{"id":{"repo_id":"baylor","oai_identifier":"oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/12323"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/baylor/oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/12323","repository":{"repo_id":"baylor","name":"Baylor University","base_url":"https://baylor-ir.tdl.org/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"[Title missing] : on the metaphysics and ethics of omissions.","abstract":"In this dissertation, I argue for a general analysis of omissions and then apply that analysis to an issue in medical ethics. One omits when they don't act in a particular way, can act in that way, the action was required for some further activity, and one is already (in some sense) engaged in that further activity. I argue, contrary to contemporary analyses, that omissions are inherently normative, in the sense that the action not done was necessary for some good to be achieved. I then apply this analysis of omissions to medical futility, which is when a medical intervention cannot benefit a patient. I argue that we should understand "benefit" as the goods that the patient can seek or that physicians can provide. I then interpret medical futility as practical impossibility, whereby benefitting the patient is impossible, either because it physically cannot succeed or because it would fail to prioritize the relevant goods. Where a treatment cannot benefit the patient, it is futile, and therefore one is not obligated to seek it. In other words, refusing or withdrawing futile treatment does not constitute killing by omission.","abstract_html":"In this dissertation, I argue for a general analysis of omissions and then apply that analysis to an issue in medical ethics. One omits when they don't act in a particular way, can act in that way, the action was required for some further activity, and one is already (in some sense) engaged in that further activity. I argue, contrary to contemporary analyses, that omissions are inherently normative, in the sense that the action not done was necessary for some good to be achieved. I then apply this analysis of omissions to medical futility, which is when a medical intervention cannot benefit a patient. I argue that we should understand "benefit" as the goods that the patient can seek or that physicians can provide. I then interpret medical futility as practical impossibility, whereby benefitting the patient is impossible, either because it physically cannot succeed or because it would fail to prioritize the relevant goods. Where a treatment cannot benefit the patient, it is futile, and therefore one is not obligated to seek it. In other words, refusing or withdrawing futile treatment does not constitute killing by omission.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Rea, Joseph Burke, 1991-"],"institution":"Baylor University.","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Haldane, John."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2022,"date_issued":"2022-08","date_published":"2022-08","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:08:02Z","subjects":["Philosophy.","Action.","Omission.","Anscombe, G. E. M. (Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret)","Medical ethics.","Medical futility."],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12323","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Haldane, John."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Rea, Joseph Burke, 1991-"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2023-09-21T13:23:47Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2023-09-21T13:23:47Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2022-08"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Baylor University."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Philosophy.","Action.","Omission.","Anscombe, G. E. M. (Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret)","Medical ethics.","Medical futility."]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12323"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["In this dissertation, I argue for a general analysis of omissions and then apply that analysis to an issue in medical ethics. One omits when they don't act in a particular way, can act in that way, the action was required for some further activity, and one is already (in some sense) engaged in that further activity. I argue, contrary to contemporary analyses, that omissions are inherently normative, in the sense that the action not done was necessary for some good to be achieved. I then apply this analysis of omissions to medical futility, which is when a medical intervention cannot benefit a patient. I argue that we should understand "benefit" as the goods that the patient can seek or that physicians can provide. I then interpret medical futility as practical impossibility, whereby benefitting the patient is impossible, either because it physically cannot succeed or because it would fail to prioritize the relevant goods. Where a treatment cannot benefit the patient, it is futile, and therefore one is not obligated to seek it. In other words, refusing or withdrawing futile treatment does not constitute killing by omission."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["[Title missing] : on the metaphysics and ethics of omissions."]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Haldane, John."],"dc:creator":["Rea, Joseph Burke, 1991-"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2023-09-21T13:23:47Z"],"dc:date.available":["2023-09-21T13:23:47Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2022-08"],"dc:description.abstract":["In this dissertation, I argue for a general analysis of omissions and then apply that analysis to an issue in medical ethics. One omits when they don't act in a particular way, can act in that way, the action was required for some further activity, and one is already (in some sense) engaged in that further activity. I argue, contrary to contemporary analyses, that omissions are inherently normative, in the sense that the action not done was necessary for some good to be achieved. I then apply this analysis of omissions to medical futility, which is when a medical intervention cannot benefit a patient. I argue that we should understand "benefit" as the goods that the patient can seek or that physicians can provide. I then interpret medical futility as practical impossibility, whereby benefitting the patient is impossible, either because it physically cannot succeed or because it would fail to prioritize the relevant goods. Where a treatment cannot benefit the patient, it is futile, and therefore one is not obligated to seek it. In other words, refusing or withdrawing futile treatment does not constitute killing by omission."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12323"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:rights":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."],"dc:subject":["Philosophy.","Action.","Omission.","Anscombe, G. E. M. (Gertrude Elizabeth Margaret)","Medical ethics.","Medical futility."],"dc:title":["[Title missing] : on the metaphysics and ethics of omissions."],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_level":["Doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["Baylor University."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:08:02Z"}