Download the poster “The Seven Golden Ethical Principles”. Our purpose here is not to resolve, or even to debate, the question of gun control. However, when faced with any problem, each of us has an ethical obligation to evaluate our own intellectual integrity. What does it say about our commitment to the truth if we condemn the fallacies in the arguments of our ideological opponents and ignore them in the arguments of our allies, or in those of ourselves? Stop looking for shortcuts, loopholes and justifications to circumvent the spirit of the law.
Look for humanity in those with whom you disagree. Demand from yourself the same intellectual integrity that you demand from others. Test your own fairness and moral objectivity. Don't try to justify your preconceptions.
They are at the midpoint of a hierarchy that, in its upper part, is formed by general theories that attempt to explain and justify certain regulatory positions (for example, deontology and the preeminence of duty in moral consideration, or theories that focus on the importance of consequences in ethical deliberation); and at the bottom it includes a series of particular rules (expressed, for example, through devices such as codes of conduct).
Morality
serves only to guide those who have a clear vision and understanding of the source and method of dissemination from which moral imperatives stem. Therefore, a moral principle of efficiency would require, for example, the use of the empirical basis and the conduct of cost-benefit analyses to decide what should be done and how to do it. When I read this research, I also thought about how each of these seven principles could be related to the three moral perspectives of the moral DNA profile, which I have noted in parenthesis and (italics).In addition, the requirement for interdisciplinary dialogue goes beyond simple public health professionals and moral philosophers and encompasses a whole range of people (for example, politicians and policy makers) simply by virtue of what public health is and what it tries to do. They also offer the possibility of a genuinely interdisciplinary dialogue between public health professionals and moral philosophers (both likely to participate in ethics-related teaching and learning in this field), at least in part because they are an “acceptable currency” for both groups of people. Within a culture that includes a panoply of beliefs, the application of morality remains subjective and abstract. His minister asks María Morales, director of the “Infectious Disease Control Unit” of the Ministry of Health of State X, to suggest whether immunization against measles should be mandatory in her region, since two children recently died from a measles outbreak.
The essence of an “inside-out” approach lies in the development of moral capacity on the part of the individual; encouraging them, following the Aristotelian line, to examine and reflect on their life and experience to gain an idea of what it means to live ethically and to inhabit an “ethical person”. In the same way, students should be encouraged to develop an awareness that the way they understand “health” (both in general and in the context of public health in particular) will have implications for the way they frame ethical discourses and move towards solving moral problems.
