Applied Ethics
A.Y. 2025/2026
Learning objectives
The course aims to offer an introduction to the topics of applied ethics and in particular of those covered in the monographic part of the course. The course aims to make students understand the key concepts and the basic methodology of applied ethics, with the aim of developing their critical sense and their ability to think analytically and independently. To this end, it makes use of the analysis of specific cases and of the reading, commentary and critical evaluation of classical and contemporary material
Expected learning outcomes
Knowledge and Understanding
Students are expected to learn about the major moral paradigms most commonly used to address issues in applied ethics, such as consequentialist ethics, deontological ethics, and virtue ethics.
Knowledge of the major issues discussed in applied ethics, with a focus on the ones discussed in the monographic part of the course.
Understanding of the major methodological approaches to practical ethics, including use of intuition and of the reflective equilibrium method.
At the end of the course, students will have acquired critical thinking skills and in depth knowledge of certain topics.
Ability to apply knowledge and understanding of the topics discussed during the course
Ability to read, understand and critically analyse a text in practical ethics.
Ability to read an applied ethics text, distinguishing the various arguments put forward by the author and placing them within a moral paradigm.
Ability to formulate hypothetical scenarios ("thought experiments") to test a moral intuition.
Ability to critically and autonomously analyse an ethical dilemma, including those not discussed during the course.
Ability to use empirical evidence from scientific disciplines in order to draw ethical conclusions.
At the end of the course the student will be able to apply philosophical vocabulary to the analysis and discussion of issues in practical ethics
Students are expected to learn about the major moral paradigms most commonly used to address issues in applied ethics, such as consequentialist ethics, deontological ethics, and virtue ethics.
Knowledge of the major issues discussed in applied ethics, with a focus on the ones discussed in the monographic part of the course.
Understanding of the major methodological approaches to practical ethics, including use of intuition and of the reflective equilibrium method.
At the end of the course, students will have acquired critical thinking skills and in depth knowledge of certain topics.
Ability to apply knowledge and understanding of the topics discussed during the course
Ability to read, understand and critically analyse a text in practical ethics.
Ability to read an applied ethics text, distinguishing the various arguments put forward by the author and placing them within a moral paradigm.
Ability to formulate hypothetical scenarios ("thought experiments") to test a moral intuition.
Ability to critically and autonomously analyse an ethical dilemma, including those not discussed during the course.
Ability to use empirical evidence from scientific disciplines in order to draw ethical conclusions.
At the end of the course the student will be able to apply philosophical vocabulary to the analysis and discussion of issues in practical ethics
Lesson period: Second semester
Assessment methods: Esame
Assessment result: voto verbalizzato in trentesimi
Single course
This course cannot be attended as a single course. Please check our list of single courses to find the ones available for enrolment.
Course syllabus and organization
Single session
Responsible
Lesson period
Second semester
Course syllabus
After a general introduction to applied ethics, some of the most relevant topics will be covered:
Abortion and infanticide
Euthanasia and assisted suicide
Conscientious objection in the medical field
Cryopreservation
Life extension
Surrogacy
Genetic engineering, human enhancement and CRISPR
Ethics of artificial intelligence
Whole brain simulation
Abortion and infanticide
Euthanasia and assisted suicide
Conscientious objection in the medical field
Cryopreservation
Life extension
Surrogacy
Genetic engineering, human enhancement and CRISPR
Ethics of artificial intelligence
Whole brain simulation
Prerequisites for admission
No prerequisite
Teaching methods
Lessons, debates on the readings, "think pare share"
Teaching Resources
All the readings for the course will be uploaded on MyAriel before the beginning of the course. The following is just a selection of the articles that will be discussed:
A defense of Abortion, JJ Thomson
A defense of Abortion, D. Boonin, Cambridge University Press, 2003 (selected chapters)
Giubilini, A. and Minerva, F., 2013. After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?. Journal of medical ethics, 39(5), pp.261-263
Oakley, J., 2012. 'After-birth abortion'and arguments from potential. Monash Bioethics Review, 30, pp.58-60.
Rini, R. A. (2013). Of course the baby should live: against 'after-birth abortion'. Journal of medical ethics, 39(5), 353-356.
Bovens, L., 2015. Child euthanasia: should we just not talk about it?. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(8), pp.630-634.
Kaczor, C., 2016. Against euthanasia for children: a response to Bovens. Journal of medical ethics, 42(1), pp.57-58.
Schuklenk, U. and Van de Vathorst, S., 2015. Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and assisted dying. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(8), pp.577-583.
Blikshavn, T., Husum, T.L. and Magelssen, M., 2017. Four reasons why assisted dying should not be offered for depression. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 14, pp.151-157.
Wicclair, Mark R. "Conscientious objection in medicine." Bioethics 14, no. 3 (2000): 205-227.
Card, R.F., 2007. Conscientious objection and emergency contraception. The American Journal of Bioethics, 7(6), pp.8-14.
Minerva, F., 2015. Conscientious objection in Italy. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(2), pp.170-173.
Giubilini, A., 2020. Conscientious objection in healthcare: neither a negative nor a positive right. The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 31(2), pp.146-153.
Minerva, F., 2018. The ethics of cryonics: Is it immoral to be immortal?. Springer. (selected chapters)
Arneson, Richard J. "Commodification and commerical surrogacy." Philosophy & Public Affairs (1992): 132-164.
Anderson, Elizabeth S. "Is Women's Labor a Commodity?" Philosophy & Public Affairs 19, no. 1 (1990): 71-92.
Wertheimer, Alan. "Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation." Philosophy & Public Affairs 21, no. 3 (1992): 211-39.
Harris, J. and Savulescu, J., 2015. A debate about moral enhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24(1), pp.8-22.
Sparrow, R., 2014. Egalitarianism and moral bioenhancement. The American Journal of Bioethics, 14(4), pp.20-28.
Sparrow, R., 2015. Enhancement and Obsolescence: Avoiding an" Enhanced Rat Race". Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 25(3), pp.231-260.
Giubilini, A. and Minerva, F., 2019, May. Enhancing equality. In The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 335-354). US: Oxford University Press.
Giubilini, A., 2015. Don't mind the gap: intuitions, emotions, and reasons in the enhancement debate. Hastings Center Report, 45(5), pp.39-47
Minerva, F. and Giubilini, A., 2018. From assistive to enhancing technology: should the treatment-enhancement distinction apply to future assistive and augmenting technologies?. Journal of medical ethics, 44(4), pp.244-247.
Douglas, T. and Devolder, K., 2024. What's the Alternative? Comparative Benefits in Gene Editing and Genetic Selection. The American Journal of Bioethics, 24(8), pp.24-26.
Gyngell, C., Douglas, T. and Savulescu, J., 2017. The ethics of germline gene editing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(4), pp.498-513.
Sandel, M.J., 2009. The Case Against Perfection: What's Wrong with Designer (selected chapters)
Bostrom, N., 2020. Ethical issues in advanced artificial intelligence. Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics, pp.69-75.
Bostrom, N. and Yudkowsky, E., 2018. The ethics of artificial intelligence.
Agar, N., 2020. How to treat machines that might have minds. Philosophy & Technology, 33(2), pp.269-282.
Sandberg, A., 2014. Ethics of brain emulations. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 26(3), pp.439-457.
Agar, N., 2011. Ray Kurzweil and uploading: Just say no!. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 22(1), pp.23-36.
Agar, N., 2014. On the prudential irrationality of mind uploading. Intelligence Unbound: Future of Uploaded and Machine Minds, pp.146-160.
A defense of Abortion, JJ Thomson
A defense of Abortion, D. Boonin, Cambridge University Press, 2003 (selected chapters)
Giubilini, A. and Minerva, F., 2013. After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?. Journal of medical ethics, 39(5), pp.261-263
Oakley, J., 2012. 'After-birth abortion'and arguments from potential. Monash Bioethics Review, 30, pp.58-60.
Rini, R. A. (2013). Of course the baby should live: against 'after-birth abortion'. Journal of medical ethics, 39(5), 353-356.
Bovens, L., 2015. Child euthanasia: should we just not talk about it?. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(8), pp.630-634.
Kaczor, C., 2016. Against euthanasia for children: a response to Bovens. Journal of medical ethics, 42(1), pp.57-58.
Schuklenk, U. and Van de Vathorst, S., 2015. Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and assisted dying. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(8), pp.577-583.
Blikshavn, T., Husum, T.L. and Magelssen, M., 2017. Four reasons why assisted dying should not be offered for depression. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 14, pp.151-157.
Wicclair, Mark R. "Conscientious objection in medicine." Bioethics 14, no. 3 (2000): 205-227.
Card, R.F., 2007. Conscientious objection and emergency contraception. The American Journal of Bioethics, 7(6), pp.8-14.
Minerva, F., 2015. Conscientious objection in Italy. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(2), pp.170-173.
Giubilini, A., 2020. Conscientious objection in healthcare: neither a negative nor a positive right. The Journal of Clinical Ethics, 31(2), pp.146-153.
Minerva, F., 2018. The ethics of cryonics: Is it immoral to be immortal?. Springer. (selected chapters)
Arneson, Richard J. "Commodification and commerical surrogacy." Philosophy & Public Affairs (1992): 132-164.
Anderson, Elizabeth S. "Is Women's Labor a Commodity?" Philosophy & Public Affairs 19, no. 1 (1990): 71-92.
Wertheimer, Alan. "Two Questions About Surrogacy and Exploitation." Philosophy & Public Affairs 21, no. 3 (1992): 211-39.
Harris, J. and Savulescu, J., 2015. A debate about moral enhancement. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 24(1), pp.8-22.
Sparrow, R., 2014. Egalitarianism and moral bioenhancement. The American Journal of Bioethics, 14(4), pp.20-28.
Sparrow, R., 2015. Enhancement and Obsolescence: Avoiding an" Enhanced Rat Race". Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 25(3), pp.231-260.
Giubilini, A. and Minerva, F., 2019, May. Enhancing equality. In The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 335-354). US: Oxford University Press.
Giubilini, A., 2015. Don't mind the gap: intuitions, emotions, and reasons in the enhancement debate. Hastings Center Report, 45(5), pp.39-47
Minerva, F. and Giubilini, A., 2018. From assistive to enhancing technology: should the treatment-enhancement distinction apply to future assistive and augmenting technologies?. Journal of medical ethics, 44(4), pp.244-247.
Douglas, T. and Devolder, K., 2024. What's the Alternative? Comparative Benefits in Gene Editing and Genetic Selection. The American Journal of Bioethics, 24(8), pp.24-26.
Gyngell, C., Douglas, T. and Savulescu, J., 2017. The ethics of germline gene editing. Journal of Applied Philosophy, 34(4), pp.498-513.
Sandel, M.J., 2009. The Case Against Perfection: What's Wrong with Designer (selected chapters)
Bostrom, N., 2020. Ethical issues in advanced artificial intelligence. Machine Ethics and Robot Ethics, pp.69-75.
Bostrom, N. and Yudkowsky, E., 2018. The ethics of artificial intelligence.
Agar, N., 2020. How to treat machines that might have minds. Philosophy & Technology, 33(2), pp.269-282.
Sandberg, A., 2014. Ethics of brain emulations. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 26(3), pp.439-457.
Agar, N., 2011. Ray Kurzweil and uploading: Just say no!. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 22(1), pp.23-36.
Agar, N., 2014. On the prudential irrationality of mind uploading. Intelligence Unbound: Future of Uploaded and Machine Minds, pp.146-160.
Assessment methods and Criteria
Oral test
Parte A e B
M-FIL/03 - MORAL PHILOSOPHY - University credits: 6
Lessons: 40 hours
Parte C
M-FIL/03 - MORAL PHILOSOPHY - University credits: 3
Lessons: 20 hours
Professor(s)
Reception:
make an appointment via email
Online on Microsoft Teams or in my office