"pills to be happy at work": steps to achieve happiness or effectiveness? Moral implications. Constraints in the emergence of Javier psicofármacos.Por Vega GómezPartamos the summary of facts: a French company, "Verizan" is installed the first vending machine of psychotropic drugs to eradicate depression and nervousness of their workers. This description of the facts is a slight difference from the one made by the writer from whom labor for reflection, Vicente Verdú, where I say "psychotropic drugs to eradicate depression and nervousness," the journalist says, pills to improve yields [ workers] to work schedules. "
The dif 
ence is far from laughable to a depth somewhat important, the writer from the first time the company statement to the manipulation of the subjective conditions of the workers so that they are best in their profession, more effective and efficient is this the real intention of the company? I agree with the author's opinion, that opinion needs pear argument, which appears not developed in the article, so I think it pertinent to the following questions: Does the company cares for the happiness and quality of life for their workers? or is the sole concern of employers is that their workers be more effective and efficient? This question that is inevitably linked to the next, is it more doping profitable workers by psychotropic drugs that enable a lifestyle more comfortable if the consequences are the same, higher performance due to greater happiness? As I said I agree with the author, so I am inclined to think that employers are the only concern that their workers be more effective and efficient and that if happiness is a condition for effectiveness and efficiency as the most profitable way of doing this is by psychotropic drugs with more flexible working hours and better wages, for example. And I believe this because I saw a society in which there has been a degradation of a conception of morally good life through the imposition of an economic conception of life, in which the morally good is replaced by the cost. Perhaps the most perverse symptom of this degradation is the use of the individual rather than a full order, but as a medium. It is pertinent, at this level of argument, consider whether the use of the individual as a medium is a cruel and inevitable consequence of life in society. Ie while living in society emerges as a way of supplying the needs that the individual faces, and this idea has had great resonance in the history of thought from Plato to Freud, every individual will have "a relationship with other individuals considering these as a means to an end and never an end in itself "so this use is inevitable (E. Fromm. 1941, page 34). If we let this view as would be found thus far allowing impunity and providing a lifestyle that totally neglects the moral component, so let's say it is a half truth but because, although we use the individual as half so we can not make an excessive use of it, a purpose which would violate its integrity. For this very reason the kingdom of ends proposed by Kant could still be an end, so help me redundancy, to be achieved, in order to consider the individual from his integrity is itself but a means to our satisfactions. We can therefore say that if the argument E. Fromm is a truth and a trap, in Kant's argument as well. And therefore we can also say that if necessary the use of individuals as a means not to be forgotten and his own integrity as an end in both individuals who are in power. This line ultimately, and so become the subject matter hereof, that the use of psychotropic drugs to improve the efficiency of workers is a violation of the integrity of these as individuals and that undermines their ability to autoproporcionarse while happiness is an additive to biological life of the subject that masks a real life unsatisfactory. So you are actually camouflaging cruel use of an individual who is not happy because of pressure from the company, remember that what we seek to avoid these psychotropic drugs is depression and anxiety and that can arise from the frustration of failing to meet unrealistic goals and nervousness due to a continuing sense of competence, symptoms deeply rooted in the kind of life force and in part they are looking for companies: they are always aim to get over and be competent in mercado.Un point not I would like to ignore is whether it is morally legitimate use of the pharmacy to autoproporcionarnos happiness. This turns out to be an issue certainly a hard look and perhaps the resolution of the issue turn to establish to what extent the individual is able to be happy himself, with his own complexion biological, ie whether it may happen that some individuals are prevented biologically to be happy. In this case would be entirely necessary psychotropic drugs as possible happiness and in turn would be morally legitimate. But this is not the same when it's not really the individual that prevents biologically happiness, but the culprit is the system itself, meaning the entire set of relationships in which the individual is immersed, from economic relations the interindividual. In this case the use of psychotropic drugs is not a necessity but a supplement to overcome a degrading situation, in this case would be morally good act on a system that is oppressive and blocking of individual potential emanating from their happiness. It is in this latter case in which we find the story here indicated. With this clarification we can identify as immoral both the supply of psychotropic drugs by the company as autosuministración of them because they are part of a mechanism of self-satisfaction with the system, or even worse are the last resort to achieve the much desired happiness, being more submissive. In this case submission while preventing the movement toward change is morally rechazable.En last I would like to know what is the generative core of such a measure to create psychotropic drugs, ie what is its use and why now in tune with current culture. In this deepening ultimately I refer to as M. Foucault called architecture of knowledge, ie the study of knowing what the right conditions for the emergence of unique knowledge of every age, for this analysis identified the individual as a knowledge psicofarmacia. In this regard I think the key question would lie in knowing what is the use of such knowledge. Well in my opinion the usefulness of science would be crazy reintegration, or in this case, the machinery depressed which is the system, using a technique such as psicofarmacia that directly affects the biological component of the individual. This could make sense that such knowledge displayed at a time that psychological illnesses are caused by a sad fashion a lifestyle that demands too much of the individual, more than it can give and also be required to receive more than need to live. The psicofarmacia would thus be a way to correct problems created by the system itself. But we can not shield us in its capacity to provide it with legitimacy solution, we can not forget it's a little moral solution to a problem that stems from a situation also immoral. Posted by Javier Vega
Gómez
ence is far from laughable to a depth somewhat important, the writer from the first time the company statement to the manipulation of the subjective conditions of the workers so that they are best in their profession, more effective and efficient is this the real intention of the company? I agree with the author's opinion, that opinion needs pear argument, which appears not developed in the article, so I think it pertinent to the following questions: Does the company cares for the happiness and quality of life for their workers? or is the sole concern of employers is that their workers be more effective and efficient? This question that is inevitably linked to the next, is it more doping profitable workers by psychotropic drugs that enable a lifestyle more comfortable if the consequences are the same, higher performance due to greater happiness? As I said I agree with the author, so I am inclined to think that employers are the only concern that their workers be more effective and efficient and that if happiness is a condition for effectiveness and efficiency as the most profitable way of doing this is by psychotropic drugs with more flexible working hours and better wages, for example. And I believe this because I saw a society in which there has been a degradation of a conception of morally good life through the imposition of an economic conception of life, in which the morally good is replaced by the cost. Perhaps the most perverse symptom of this degradation is the use of the individual rather than a full order, but as a medium. It is pertinent, at this level of argument, consider whether the use of the individual as a medium is a cruel and inevitable consequence of life in society. Ie while living in society emerges as a way of supplying the needs that the individual faces, and this idea has had great resonance in the history of thought from Plato to Freud, every individual will have "a relationship with other individuals considering these as a means to an end and never an end in itself "so this use is inevitable (E. Fromm. 1941, page 34). If we let this view as would be found thus far allowing impunity and providing a lifestyle that totally neglects the moral component, so let's say it is a half truth but because, although we use the individual as half so we can not make an excessive use of it, a purpose which would violate its integrity. For this very reason the kingdom of ends proposed by Kant could still be an end, so help me redundancy, to be achieved, in order to consider the individual from his integrity is itself but a means to our satisfactions. We can therefore say that if the argument E. Fromm is a truth and a trap, in Kant's argument as well. And therefore we can also say that if necessary the use of individuals as a means not to be forgotten and his own integrity as an end in both individuals who are in power. This line ultimately, and so become the subject matter hereof, that the use of psychotropic drugs to improve the efficiency of workers is a violation of the integrity of these as individuals and that undermines their ability to autoproporcionarse while happiness is an additive to biological life of the subject that masks a real life unsatisfactory. So you are actually camouflaging cruel use of an individual who is not happy because of pressure from the company, remember that what we seek to avoid these psychotropic drugs is depression and anxiety and that can arise from the frustration of failing to meet unrealistic goals and nervousness due to a continuing sense of competence, symptoms deeply rooted in the kind of life force and in part they are looking for companies: they are always aim to get over and be competent in mercado.Un point not I would like to ignore is whether it is morally legitimate use of the pharmacy to autoproporcionarnos happiness. This turns out to be an issue certainly a hard look and perhaps the resolution of the issue turn to establish to what extent the individual is able to be happy himself, with his own complexion biological, ie whether it may happen that some individuals are prevented biologically to be happy. In this case would be entirely necessary psychotropic drugs as possible happiness and in turn would be morally legitimate. But this is not the same when it's not really the individual that prevents biologically happiness, but the culprit is the system itself, meaning the entire set of relationships in which the individual is immersed, from economic relations the interindividual. In this case the use of psychotropic drugs is not a necessity but a supplement to overcome a degrading situation, in this case would be morally good act on a system that is oppressive and blocking of individual potential emanating from their happiness. It is in this latter case in which we find the story here indicated. With this clarification we can identify as immoral both the supply of psychotropic drugs by the company as autosuministración of them because they are part of a mechanism of self-satisfaction with the system, or even worse are the last resort to achieve the much desired happiness, being more submissive. In this case submission while preventing the movement toward change is morally rechazable.En last I would like to know what is the generative core of such a measure to create psychotropic drugs, ie what is its use and why now in tune with current culture. In this deepening ultimately I refer to as M. Foucault called architecture of knowledge, ie the study of knowing what the right conditions for the emergence of unique knowledge of every age, for this analysis identified the individual as a knowledge psicofarmacia. In this regard I think the key question would lie in knowing what is the use of such knowledge. Well in my opinion the usefulness of science would be crazy reintegration, or in this case, the machinery depressed which is the system, using a technique such as psicofarmacia that directly affects the biological component of the individual. This could make sense that such knowledge displayed at a time that psychological illnesses are caused by a sad fashion a lifestyle that demands too much of the individual, more than it can give and also be required to receive more than need to live. The psicofarmacia would thus be a way to correct problems created by the system itself. But we can not shield us in its capacity to provide it with legitimacy solution, we can not forget it's a little moral solution to a problem that stems from a situation also immoral. Posted by Javier Vega Gómez
0 comments:
Post a Comment