|
|
『有时候，已死的人似乎比植物人更算“活着”。』
How dead is dead?
怎样算死了？
Aug 20, 2011 | From The Economist
cdec199e260247a388ef3fe67e7b4d0d43.jpg
IN GENERAL, people are pretty good at differentiating between the quick and the dead. Modern medicine, however, has created a third option, the persistent vegetative state. People in such a state have serious brain damage as a result of an accident or stroke. This often means they have no hope of regaining consciousness. Yet because parts of their brains that run activities such as breathing are intact, their vital functions can be sustained indefinitely.
When, if ever, to withdraw medical support from such people, and thus let them die, is always a traumatic decision. It depends in part, though, on how the fully alive view the mental capacities of the vegetative—an area that has not been investigated much.
To fill that gap Kurt Gray of the University of Maryland, and Annie Knickman and Dan Wegner of Harvard University, conducted an experiment designed to ascertain just how people perceive those in a persistent vegetative state. What they found astonished them.
They first asked 201 people stopped in public in New York and New England to answer questions after reading one of three short stories. In all three, a man called David was involved in a car accident and suffered serious injuries. In one, he recovered fully. In another, he died. In the third, his entire brain was destroyed except for one part that kept him breathing. Although he was technically alive, he would never again wake up.
After reading one of these stories, chosen at random, each participant was asked to rate David’s mental capacities, including whether he could influence the outcome of events, know right from wrong, remember incidents from his life, be aware of his environment, possess a personality and have emotions. Participants used a seven-point scale to make these ratings, where 3 indicated that they strongly agreed that he could do such things, 0 indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed, and -3 indicated that they strongly disagreed.
The results, reported in Cognition, were that the fully recovered David rated an average of 1.77 and the dead David -0.29. That score for the dead David was surprising enough, suggesting as it did a considerable amount of mental acuity in the dead. What was extraordinary, though, was the result for the vegetative David: -1.73. In the view of the average New Yoq�ky"http://kaoyan.koolearn.com/zhuanshuo/mt/" target="_blank">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"http://www.economist.com/node/21526321" target="_blank">http://www.economist.com/node/21526321 |
|
发表于 2017-8-5 22:02:39