LUMEN NASHS 2020 – ANTONIO SANDU: WHEN ACADEMIC FREEDOM GOES AGAINST POLITICAL (IN)CORRECTNESS
Virtual presentation within THE 7th LUMEN CONFERENCE NASHS 2020 | JUNE 25-26 | ONLINE CONFERENCE By: Antonio Sandu (”Stefan cel Mare” University of Suceava, Romania) Presentation title: ”When Academic Freedom Goes Against Political (In)correctness” This presentation was recorded the 17th of June, a day after the criticized law Project was adopted by the Romanian Parliament. Abstract: The paper starts from a critical analysis of a proposal to amend the Romanian National Education Law, which prohibits in any educational institution – including universities – the exposure in any form of gender identity theory which states that gender identity does not absolutely coincide with the sex with which the individual was born. We believe that such a ban limits academic freedom, the freedom of expression, the university autonomy, introduces the premises for censorship of research, making very difficult and practically prohibiting gender studies. This is, in our opinion, intolerable, as long as politics intervenes in the choice of research topics and censors the presentation of scientific theories, even if they are rejected by the majority of the population and possibly by the entire scientific community. Instead of censoring politically undesirable theories, the epistemological distancing of the researcher from the expressed theories should be supported as well as the expression of the methodological reservation regarding a possible subsequent invalidation of the theory. From ethical point of view, the delimitation of academic freedom opens the way for discretionary manifestation in education and research and for discrimination on the basis of political opinion or even on the basis of gender criteria or gender orientation.
ANTONIO SANDU: DIN SERIA „ÎNTÂLNIRILE DE JOIA”: COMPETENȚE TRANSFERABILE
În cadrul „Întâlnirilor de joia cu bioetica și etica aplicată” – o discuție despre competențe transferabile. Despre cine poate fi consilier, cine poate practica psihoterapie sau psihologie judiciară. Despre consilierea filosofică ca formă de terapie existențială. Prelegerea a fost susținută online la data de 11.06.2020
WCB 2020 ANTONIO SANDU: BIOETHICAL ACCEPTABILITY OF EUTHANASIA IN GREEK ORTHODOX RELIGIOUS CONTEXT (ACCEPTABILITATEA BIOETICA A EUTANASIEI IN CONTEXT ORTODOX)
BIOETHICAL ACCEPTABILITY OF EUTHANASIA IN THE GREEK ORTHODOX RELIGIOUS CONTEXT Authors: Prof. PhD. Hab. Antonio SANDU (Professor PhD Head of Department of Law and Public Administration “Stefan cel Mare” University of Suceava, Romania & Director of LUMEN Research Center in Social and Humanistic Sciences, Iasi, Romania, “Stefan cel Mare” University of Suceava, Romania & LUMEN Research Center in Social and Humanistic Sciences, Iasi, Romania) PhD. Ana FRUNZĂ (Researcher in Philosophy, LUMEN Research Center in Social and Humanistic Sciences; “Stefan cel Mare” University of Suceava, Romania) PhD. student Alexandra HUIDU (Researcher, Doctoral School of Sociology, University of Oradea, Oradea, Romania; LUMEN Research Center in Social and Humanistic Sciences, Iasi, Romania) Presenting: Prof. PhD. Hab. Antonio SANDU Abstract Background: Religious affiliation influences decisions about the ethical acceptance of euthanasia. The Greek Orthodox Christian Church expressly opposes the approval of euthanasia; therefore, believers strongly oppose this practice. Objectives: The paper analyzes the instances of social construction of the acceptability of euthanasia in the Greek Orthodox Christian religious context. Methods: A series of three focus groups and ten individual interviews were undertaken with people belonging to the Greek Orthodox Christian religion in northeastern Romania. The interviews addressed how people make their decisions about the ethical acceptability of euthanasia and how religious beliefs inspired by Orthodox Christianity are reflected in the decision-making process regarding the acceptability or unacceptability of an extreme medical practice, including interrupting the course of life at the patient’s request. The focus group later watched an artistic film with a strong emotional impact, which presented the opinion of a person with an unbearable medical condition, who decided to resort to euthanasia. The reaction of the participants was observed and the elements of acceptability or unacceptability of euthanasia, as well as the ethical-religious background of the decision, were questioned again. Data analysis was performed using the Grounded Theory method. Findings: The emotional factor and discursive contingency of the reference group significantly contributes to nuancing religious beliefs. Conclusion: The bioethical discourse on euthanasia should be overtoned to take into account not only religious beliefs, but also the emotional context in which the acceptability of an extreme medical practice is socially constructed.