Emperor1956
Posts: 2370
Joined: 11/7/2005 Status: offline
|
To TreasureKY and the OP, and the other folks that commented on my comment -- First, I was surprised at the unanimity of my students. I expected some debate. I certainly did not expect the three persons with military service to be so firmly in the camp favoring (indeed, demanding) discipline. The reason I cited my class' discussions was because to them, there WAS no dispute. The conduct of the physicians reported in the NYT report was as heinous, and subject to discipline, as would a report that military physicians were using their rank to sexually molest patients. I was surprised that THEY found it so cut-and-dried. The basic consensus of the group, by the way, was around two points: One, that a physician has no place being involved in essentially destructive, not healing, behaviors (I think you could safely call this "first do no harm"). Two, that the acts were in fact illegal -- and some of my students might come out the other way if the torture was done according to the "rulebooks". But those familiar with the Army Manual on Interrogation have said that many of the techniques reported were not sanctioned or legal. (I realize this opens up an entire new can of worms about the definition of "legal torture" and if morally such a position can be staked out.) Therefore for some of my students, the question was "was this conduct legally permitted?" and their answer was "no." Second, yes, Treasure, they are only "opinions", but they are the opinions of people who think about this issue on a regular basis, have a stake in the outcome, and maybe -- just maybe -- have a bit more background in the issue than you do? We are all guided by opinions. We all reject some and embrace others. But to say "oh, that's just an opinion" is sophistry. Sure its an opinion. Is it well-founded? Is it useful? If so, what's wrong with accepting those that make sense? Further, Treasure, your point about everyone involved being a licensed professional doesn't make sense to me. Could you explain it? You seem to be saying "well if someone was a wrongdoer and they were licensed, then its ok." By that logic, NO professional could ever be disciplined. You seem to be saying "HEY, I'm a DOCTOR. Anything I do/say is acceptable!" I don't think you are that simple. And finally, to say "so what" in intellectual discussion (which is basically your current position) is to say either that you believe you are right no matter what, or that you are bored and no longer wish to defend your position. I would hope its the latter (and I understand how these discussions -- whether one perceives he is winning, or losing -- get tedious). And Owner59, you are welcome. I didn't post for you *smile*. But a sincere thank you is always nice. E.
_____________________________
"When you wake up, Pooh," said Piglet, "what's the first thing you say?" "What's for breakfast? What do you say, Piglet?" "I say, I wonder what's going to happen exciting today?" Pooh nodded thoughtfully. "It's the same thing," he said.
|