• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.47-75
• /
• 2008

Research on moral judgment has been dominated by rational factor or moral emotion, in which moral judgment is thought to be caused by moral reasoning or moral intuitions. This research demonstrates that offender' anger can influence moral judgment. The study examined the role of offender's anger (control group versus anger group) on moral domain ( life, interpersonal ethic, traffic regulation: 6 case) : 2(groups) ×6(cases) mixed design. Participants were asked to judge the offender, case, sympathy and one's anger about the him or her who offended against the law or convention. Participants who perceived the offender's anger tended to assess questionnaire generous. In interpersonal ethic domain, participants have not been affected by anger. There was not significantly differences between two groups in interpersonal ethic domain. The results of experiment confirmed hypotheses that influence of anger varies with the moral domains affected a value system of culture. These findings indicate functional emotion for moral judgment and suggest people may be decide how much emotion is considered on moral judgment performance according to moral domains.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.11-38
• /
• 2009

"Bioethics" may have various meanings depending on its roles. It may mean professional ethics for scientists and physicians, etc. It may also mean an academic discipline using interdisciplinary approach as well as a philosophical or a legal approach. "Bioethics" as an interdisciplinary study should often deal with public policy on bioethical issues. I call this role bioethics as a study of bioethics policy, which has to be developed as a new discipline. From this perspective, I deal with bioethical issues relevant to a human life before birth. There are various and often conflicting arguments about the moral status of a human life before birth such as the fertilization argument, the argument of genetic identity, so-called the "14 days" argument focusing on the formation of primitive streak, the argument of sentient being, and Michael Sandle's argument of an embryo as a being between a thing and a person. I argue that each of them is reasonable. Thus we are faced with reasonable disagreement on the views over whether a human life before birth has the same right to life as that of a person or whether right to life may be considered to be a matter of degree. If we acknowledge reasonable disagreement, as John Rawls pointed out, we should tolerate the views from ours in a plural society. Therefore, we cannot help making a policy that allows abortion and embryonic research with some limitations. When we say a certain act is morally permissible, "moral permissibility" does not mean that the act is morally right for all. Rather it means that the act cannot help being morally allowed for some persons although the others do not believe its moral rightness because they cannot right now rationally persuade others to accept their view.

• Science of Emotion and Sensibility
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.15-30
• /
• 2019

The reduction of traffic accidents is a primary potential benefit of autonomous vehicles (AVs). However, the prevalence of AVs also arouses a key question: to what extent should a human wrest control back from AVs? Specifically, in an unavoidable situation of emergency, should an AV be able to decide between the safety of its own passengers and endangered pedestrians? Should AV programming include well-accepted decision rules about actionsto take in hypothetical situations? The current study (N = 103) examined individual/situational variables that could perform critical decision-making roles in AV related traffic accidents. The individual variable of attitudes toward AVs was assessed using the Self-driving Car Acceptance Scale. To investigate situational influences on decisional processes, the study's participants were assigned to one of two groups: the achievement value was activated in one group and the benevolence value was triggered in the other through the use of a sentence completion task. Thereafter, participants were required to indicate who should be protected from injury: the passengers of the concerned AV, or endangered pedestrians. Participants were also asked to record the extent to which they intended to buy an AV programmed to decide in favor of the greater good according to Utilitarian principles. The results suggested that participants in the "achievement value: driver perspective" groupexpressed the lowest willingness to sacrifice themselves to save several pedestrians in an unavoidable traffic accident. This group of participants was also the most reluctant to buy an AV programmed with utilitarian rules, even though there were significant positive relationships between members' acceptance of AVs and their expressed intention to purchase one. These findings highlight the role of the decisional processes involved in the "achievement value" pertaining to AVs. The paper finally records the limitations of the present study and suggests directions for future research.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.113-142
• /
• 2018

In recent years, there have been opinions in which physicians are liable to the revocation of their medical license if they are sentenced to above a certain level for criminal charges regardless of the types of offenses. Accordingly, a revised bill of law was submitted in the National Assembly, and related discussions are thus expected to commence. Considering the morality and ethics or the level of the rule of law that the general public expects of physicians, as well as the license revocation system in other professional sectors, it is assessed that medical license revocation due to criminal convictions of physicians is appropriate to some degree. However, if a poorly devised system is established based on unrefined inferences or emotional judgements, unexpected side-effects are likely to arise. With regard to serious criminal acts that society generally perceives as unacceptable, it can be assessed that the revocation of physicians' licenses would appropriately protect the general public from threats. However, given the life-saving characteristics of high-risk medical practices, higher malpractice exposures, and social values, it is difficult to assess charges of professional negligence resulting in death(or in injury) and minor offences in the same manner as anti-social criminal offences are handled. Physicians need to be treated the same as any other professions. At the same time, they are engaged in administering medical treatment to patients in the face of great risks as professionals. Under the circumstances, a discussion on the introduction of a more specific and empirical system is needed by considering the intrinsic characteristics of medical treatment and the need for an equitable health and medical policy. Accordingly, based on the above judgment and perception, this study explores the code of ethics for physicians and medical license revocation related to criminal offences at home and abroad, and examines various legislative alternatives appropriate for the Republic of Korea. In doing so, the purpose of the study is to contribute to the development of a reasonable system for handling criminal offences by physicians.