A Preliminary Philosophical Investigation into Moral Issues of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Keywords:2019冠狀病毒病疫情, 權利, 後果評價, 能力進路, 儒家
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.
在2019冠狀病毒疫情之下，至少有兩個公共術生政策的道德議題變得異常重要。第一，現時有不少爭議是關於這些抗疫政策與個人自由的衡突。這是很典型的公共善與個人自由衡突的道德爭論，但疫情令這樣的衡突成為直接而迫切的顧慮。第 二，這個世界在疫情之前已有很多嚴重的不平等問題，但現在有些防疫政策令社會的不平等變得更為嚴重。儘管本文不會為這兩個道德議題給予肯定的解答，但會集中探究在討論這些道德議題的跨學科辯論中，應該用到甚麽道德推論和基礎，並會 詳細解釋以下幾個重要理念。第一，作者會論證，衛生道德人權的理念並不能充分地成為解決這些問題的道德基礎。第二， 不純粹用到權利進路的話，作者會論證應該用到阿馬蒂亞.森的後果評價和能力進路作為道德推論和基礎。第三，這兩個由森提出的理念可以把不同的道德理論和傳統與公共衛生議題連繫起來。作者會以儒家為道德傳統的例子，論證如何以後果 評價、能力進路和儒家當中的一些理念與價值，以此提出一些可能方向，去處理上述兩個道德議題。
At least two moral issues of some public health policies have become significant in the COVID-19 pandemic. First, it is arguable that some policies to address the present pandemic conflict with individual freedom. This is a typical moral debate between public good and individual freedom, but the COVID-19 pandemic has made this conflict a more immediate and urgent concern. Second, the world had serious inequality problems prior to the pandemic, and some of the new public health policies have caused more severe social inequalities. Instead of providing definitive answers to these two moral issues, this paper focuses on what types of moral reasoning and foundation should be used in the interdisciplinary debates around these problems. Several ideas are discussed in detail. First, the author argues that the idea of moral human rights to health is not a sufficient moral foundation to solve these problems. Second, the author argues that in addition to the right talk, we should use Amartya Sen’s consequential evaluation and the capability approach as the foundation and moral reasoning. Third, the author argues that these two ideas from Sen can connect different moral traditions with public health issues. The author uses Confucianism as an example of a moral tradition, and argues for possible directions to address the moral issues using ideas and values from consequential evaluation, the capability approach, and Confucianism.
DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 60 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020 International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The CC BY license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s).