Re: Gene Therapy & Ethics [was Re: AI Backlash] (fwd)

From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Sun Aug 15 1999 - 10:53:36 MDT


> jmcasey@pacific.net.sg wrote:

Re: informed consent for therapies

> And indeed, everyone, no matter how "intelligent" is going to have blind spots.

Agreed. It is part of the job of a "competent" medical practicioner to
be aware of this and attempt to educate individuals when that is the case.

> I think this phrase, informed consent, is too vague to be of much use.

Well, you have to give "consent", and it is nice to be "informed" about
what you are consenting to. Obviously, a person receiving treatment can
rarely understand things as well as the person providing treatment (due
to the differences in education & experience). The goal of the process
however is to provide an individual with enough information that they
can "feel" they are making a correct decision (i.e. they have taken
control of and responsibility for the action).

> The other issue you allude to is the extent to which experience shapes
> our perceptions. Someone with a sufficiently traumatic past is going to
> see danger where it doesn't exist. Is this intelligent?

The danger will always exist, it may have a very low probability however.
It is probably an indicator of intelligence that (a) a person consider
*all* of the possibilities and (b) get the relative probabilities of
those possibilities close to what they typically are in reality.
An intelligent person with a traumatic past will recognize that their
experiences are not reflective of the experiences of the average
person in the population. I will grant, that knowing this may
not make it any easier to make calm, rational decisions. Traumatic
events get wired in at very low levels in the brain.

Robert



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:46 MST