SC in constructing patient-doctor relationship

This post deals with the patient-doctor relationship and centers around the consultative session during which the patient and doctor 1) provide each other information regarding the patient's health and 2) the doctor makes recommendations regarding the care he is willing to provide the patient. The patient may consent to the plan of care the doctor is offering or may not. The patient may seek a second opinion or do nothing at all (assuming his condition is not contagious or obviously life-threatening). Using the social contract model, the patient retains responsibility for his own health care program, including its specific goals; and the doctor is advising what he can do with respect to that program. The patient and the doctor may agree to a further contractual relationship; and it is always to advantage to have any plan for further diagnosis and treatment in writing, preferably signed by the parties involved.

So what is this contract? The doctor promises to provide some particular medical services, e.g., administer tests and inform the patient of their results, and the patient agrees to pay for them. In the consultative session, information is exchanged but neither patient nor doctor need agree to either further testing or remedial treatment. Being a patient in no way implies coming under a doctor's control in the sense that the patient, as a contractual party, has given up his responsibility for his own health program.

In the book Hippocrates' Shadow, 2008, the author David H. Newman makes the point that the typical medical doctor is applying science, in particular, the results of scientific research, in the advice he offers to his patient. Newman argues that any advice should be sensible. It should be based on what procedures and methods are available given the patient with whom he is dealing. It could suggest, based on scientific evidence, that with the patient's age, gender and life-style, the patient is subject to a degree of risk of incurring certain diseases, but the patient must be convinced that what he is advised to do will be of benefit to him, not simply the advice a doctor would give anyone into whose class or category the patient fits.

Seemingly, the whole system of medical consultation is predicated upon an assembly-line approach to medical care, in which a doctor who detects the possibility of a certain medical malady in his patient, automatically ships him off to the specialist who automatically prepares him for the surgeon. For example, a patient who has fallen and incurred injury to his arm consults a doctor when the injury does not heal within a reasonable length of time. The doctor takes x-rays that reveal the arm is broken. In the consultative session, the doctor advises surgery, as if seemingly unaware that the arm could become just as usable by other methods, e.g., arm exercises and heat therapy. There's the way of surgery, and apparently, none other, for some physicians!

Offering sensible consultative advice means recognizing there's more than one way to handle a medical condition and that some measures for handling it are more appropriate in given situations. For instance, a kidney transplant probably is not a realistic option for an 85-year old man; and the surgeon who would recommend it may be uneasy in so doing. Again, the more options that are discussed with the patient--for diagnosis and for therapeutic treatment--the more confidcnt the patient can feel that the doctor is offering sound advice.

Nonetheless, the doctor who has rendered a medical opinion in a consultative session may be disposed to record not only his diagnostic findings but his recommendations in some database containing the patient's medical history. I think that to do so would negate the conditions of the contractual agreement between doctor and patient as agreed upon. But the doctor may feel himself in position to truly assess the patient's health status as to be certain of his advice. As stated in Hippocrates' Shadow (though not in these words), the doctor may believe with scientific certainty (because he is relying on scientific research) that he knows the patient's health better than the patient himself, and may contend, upon such knowledge, his remedial plan has been formulated. That is to say, for some physician who has performed tests and rendered his opinion, the matter of what the patient must do is a certainty!

Oh, those consultative sessions! A matter of conflict of interest?
For the doctor who both has administered diagnostic tests and rendered a course of remedy, there might be construed a conflict of interest. For he stands to benefit from continuing with the patient in most cases. When the tests are conducted in the doctor's own offices and by his own staff, there might be further cause for suspicion rather than for trust. This may be especially a patient's concern when the patient has consulted with the doctor for just some initial sessions.

Incidentally with regard to my own experience through the years, I've found that independent medical groups--such as laboratories, ambulance personnel, and screening agencies; and even county health fairs--are useful in informing about my personal health. It would probably be more beneficial if medical practitioners doing diagnoses of one's health be not involved in the remedial determinations.

We all are familiar with the book Arrowsmith by Sinclair Lewis. It raises our awareness that certain treatments are more advantageous for the doctor to recommend. We're also familiar with the practices of some automobile mechanics who, merely by noting a car 5 years old, say, will recommend a rebuilt transmission replace the one giving the owner problems, whether or not there's sufficient reason for a replacement. That doctors may make recommendations based upon categories into which a patient may appropriately be place, e.g., he's over 65, suggests the ready-made approach to the consultative session, i.e., the patient is merely a category-type.

Further consider in the automobile example, that should a rebuilt transmission be installed, the customer may incur further automotive malfunctions, simply because the other parts with which the rebuilt transmission functions are old. Particularly where the medical procedures are invasive, the patient may experience adversive effects because of them.

So, don't forget the option for a second opinion!
The notion of getting a second opinion stems from the recognitioon that the patient has not agreed to any further testing nor medical proedure with the doctor beyond that of the consultative session. To be of even greater value, the doctor whose opinion is sought as the second opinion should conduct his own series of tests before rendering his advice; and preferably, to assure objectivity, he should not be part of the same medical unit as the doctor who offered the first opinion nor of the same hospital staff.

Non-traditional therapies
A common complaint of patients is that the doctor whose opinion they sought does not know of homeopathic remedies nor of alternative approaches to health care than that offered through medical science. Yet, there are non-traditional therapies; and there are consultants familiar with their applications. After all, some of these remedies have been developed and used over centuries.

Vitamin supplements may be useful, too. The aim is to develop a strategy that makes sense to the patient, particularly with respect to cost and the likelihood of being effective.

Being Married: Your Competitive Edge

General Discussion
There's a fundamental natural law of all living things: The Principle of Survival of the Fittest. For human beings, that means it's best to live in a society among others like you. No Walden Pond, your society has a good life ideal that you are to imagine is within your reach. Now it so happens that you can enhance the chances of living that good life, should you marry. At that juncture, you're not acting on your own but as a team player, each of whom can lead a good life that your society offers as benefits for your continued team effort. You may live longer, certainly are likely to live better because you've contracted to living in a marriage situation and are committed to your marriage team, contingent upon your doing what you want in life.

I knew a marriage counselor named Jim in Oakland, California. He ran a socials party for singles on Saturday nights that I attended a few times between my first and second marriages. He wasn't married, which I thought was strange, but after learning his view on marriage, I could see why. He argued that marriage keeps each partner stagnated, a creature of habit, not given to pursuing his own self-development. It's true, certainly, that frequently when a marriage counselor is consulted because the marriage is "on the rocks," he will urge the partners to rekindle the experiences that brought them together originally, so as to renew the spark. Personal change in a partner can be devastating to a marriage, as in cases of disabling disease, change of career; drastic alteration in earning power through job loss. I think a marriage counselor hopes to get each spouse to show commitment to the team once again, if only they can be made to realize that success in living can be each of theirs through their efforts on behalf of the team! Separation and divorce initiated by your partner is a public declaration that you need to strive harder to reach the social well-being you want in your life!

Marriage gives an advantage to leading the good life based on assuming marital responsibilities. I think the male's use of Viagra is symptomatic of his desire to keep sex in the marriage--just as it has always been. He's trying to live up to his past performance during marriage. Similarly, the spouse needs to have a good job and if the marriage is based on a two salary income, then the partner must also. They should be willing to pool their assets, including their monies. When one team member becomes sick, the other should to do more to keep the marriage healthy. In most marriages, kids are wanted; but must be adequately supported. Lots of marriage responsibilities.

Government is the overseer to your contract, critical when a team member fails to live up to his responsibilities through such anti-social behaviors as excessive drinking or drug-taking; or gambling; or doing violence. Government will in these situations dissolve the marriage, and try to help the partner re-adjust.

The typical plan for the good life that society offers its members
You know the plan by heart, since third grade. Get your education for a good-paying job, preferably in a profession. Take the job you feel comfortable in working. Buy a really nice car. Find a mate through dating. Get married; go from renting an apartment to owning a house that the two of you can afford. Pool your monies. Have kids; get life insurance. Save for retirement and as a parent passes on, add what assets are left you to your team's. Say "Off you go!" to your kids--one by one. At mid-life crisis, think about what you could have done with your life; and how much better life could have been; but don't change anything! Get a watch at your retirement party. Go off travelling with your mate in your waning years. Prepare yourself for the diseases of old-age; and have enough money set aside for a burial plot and a decent funeral. In your will, leave the house to your surviving spouse and die with dignity and respectability. By becoming a team-player in marriage, you've got a really good chance to make society's delineation of the good life become concretized into "This is your life.!" Having the great car, the house in a prestigeous location, being known in the community for your generous contributions to charity and the arts, becoming manager of little league baseball team, serving on the school board, eating out at great restaurants, going to Vegas twice a year, owning a prosperous business, even being elected to political office--yes, all that is within your reach and become lively options of things to do once you're married!

Remember, that you, as a responsible citizen, are not only endorsing your society's lifestyle but recommending it to your children and your grandchildren.

The Plan altered by current social trends
Because women have entered the workforce in such numbers, and frequently today, are making as much money as men, and because any worker may have to find a job outside a particular preferred location, the social phenomenon of single parenting is becoming widespread (if married, then the partner needs a new job, too). Nearly half of the children are born out of wedlock. But just that you are a parent with a kid by your side living with you wherever you go bestows the stability associated with marriage upon the caregiver! She has the look of being an upright citizen, one capable of assuming responsibilities associated with marriage. The established household substitutes for that of a stable marriage. As single parent, you're entitled to own a house, serve on the school board--in sum, you can have all the benefits accruing to living the good life!

Critique of being married: Where's your self-development?
If you're pursuing the good life as we think of it, then
--Shun anyone going back to school to learn a new trade; or wants to gain more knowledge. He's not someone married people should want around. Changing careers means making less money, making less of a contribution to a marriage. He clearly wants to change himself; he's not thinking as a team player but has only himself in mind.
--Shun the social isolate, defined as not having nor pursuing social goals for the good life; but of being a party-pooper. He may also be an independent thinker, not given to being a member of a team.
--Shun the constant airline passenger. He's likely to have committed himself to marriages at every destination and really doesn't have time to devote to any one of them to yield successful results for his partner.

Mentor System of Education

Remember the little old schoolhouse? I think those days are back. Courses, at least partially online; teacher availability in the classroom and the computer lab; students familiar with the computer well enough to play games on Play Station 2! The new little schoolhouse!

What's missing in this educative scenario is the social contract. If implemented, a contractual plan would be in place, periodically updated or exchanged for a new one, to reflect the student's learning and the educator's evaluation of progress. Today, the student's achievement is measured nationally, even globally, by means of standardized tests. Why should not the student enter into contractual arrangement with his educators so that not only are learning demands made of him but the benefits of his achievement be spelled out? For instance, the student would get a star on an achievement chart, a certificate of accomplishment, and when were parents involved, a weekend trip to Disneyworld, a bike, even money!

Even when a specific contract is unattained, i.e., unfulfilled, the student's level of abilities and skills would be taken into account in writing the next. Hours spent during each contractual period could be accumulated to reflect the difficulty the student was having in any one area of the subject matter. There need no time set aside for doing homework, for the student could limit his study-time to the times he could contact a mentor. I say "mentor" because the time the student would be studying is delimited by the time that someone is available to assist in his learning process, e.g., by answering questions, giving answers to selected problems. What is necessary for this envisioned learning situation to work is the availability of a mentor during the student's learning session.

The nice thing about carefully constructing a learner's contract is the conference at which the learner and educator both sign it. Parents and child on one side of the table; teacher and principle or guidance counselor on the other. The contract thereupon placed in the child's folder. Then, upon completion of the contract or its termination, the parents and child and teacher and guidance counselor meet to go over the student's progress and note any problems and shortcomings by either side. Simple enough.

A breach would necessitate the student's placement in another school, even as is the current practice today. Indeed, there is nothing new being posited here, just a change of emphasis upon the student rather than upon the school.

Current Educative Practices within the Social Contract Framework
Vocational training at most private and public community colleges are using the model. And though today's schools are still organized for "mass schooling" in contradistinction to "student-oriented schooling" herein advocated, as educators come to integrate the computer into the learning process, the latter notion may gain in acceptance. Be it noted, educators would need to know a good deal more about their students than is presently the case.

Adjunct learning institutions, not schools, what are sometimes referred to as "shadow education systems" also employ the social contract understanding. In such a system, a science curriculum is taught in a chemistry lab, a computer lab, and a classroom with an instructor; and through several conference calls in which students and teacher participate via a computer network.

Tailoring the teaching in light of the cultural heritage and background of each particular student I believe holds promise of significant student achievement; and when the teaching is presented through a myriad of technologies the possibilities of attaining even a higher level is likely.

I personally have found the new teacher draws upon online teaching materials though he remains committed to classroom hours of instruction, in terms of which his own teaching contract is stated.

Ethics in Social Contract Structure

Perhaps, this post in the series of Social Contract analysis is the most important. Locke knew a lot about government, but the subject matter of society itself had not become studied until Emil Durkheim and the great anthropologists in the early part of the 20th Century, which culminated in the establishment of sociology as a scientific discipline. This post's content takes advantage of the knowledge accumulated under the rubric of sociology and social psychology.



The starting point of SC as an ethical theory is the understanding that the individual, i.e., the self, is a member of a particular society. His society recognizes his being at birth, when the attending nurse or doctor spanks and talks to the baby and secures the appropriate response from the infant. By means of this process, the baby is welcomed as another human being in the world; and a self (which sees himself as others see him as stated by G. H. Mead, sociologist) is created.



Making society pivotal to ethical issues and questions has certain implications:



1. Being moral implies measuring up to society's standards of conduct. Through the educative process, the child learns how to behave, that is, the self develops; the individual is socialized.



2. Society enters into a contractual relationship with each societal member. In primitive society, that relationship is symbolized in the rites of becoming an adult, e.g., at age 13, when the self becomes mature; and is so recognized by the elders. He has learned and performed in accordance with his training the behaviors appropriate to particular situations. In return for the continuance of proper performance, the individual is given respect by his society. In classical philosophy, this notion of respect is sometimes referred to as "the freedom to act": the societal member is given leeway to act in accord with his own purposes and by his own intentions. As a trained individual, he is not being forced to act as others in the community might want him to. He is his own self!



3. There is continual acknowledgement of the contractual relationship by the parties involved: self and society. Whenever the individual answers the question "Who are you?" he affirms his standing in this contractual bind. For the ascription of one's self-identity has social meaning and grants to the individual social status among his peers. Such claims as "I am a plumber," "I am a student," "I am retired" become claims in society as to certain rights and privileges, e.g., can hang out of a building a professional shingle. Note that the self is always developing, ever changing as he takes on new identities and loses others, which become but memories.

4. Through training, the self takes on moral worth. Society sets up behaviors and rules governing the roles one assumes. As long as the individual stays within the boundaries of acceptable behavior for the role, i.e., acts in accord with his training, he is doing the moral thing.
For example, a nurse whose patient says he wants to commit suicide, because the pain is so great, yet does not assist her patient is acting in accord with the ethical guidelines of her profession. That is to say, she is acting responsibily (e.g. by telling the attending doctor or her supervisor of the patient's express desire). She ought not in any way assist the patient to do what her profession tells her she must not. She cannot appeal to some "higher authority" as granting her special license to act contrary to her training; and regard herself morally on high ground.

5. Since society sets forth rules and regulations for right action, as a trained member of society acting in situ, the individual is not confronted with some moral dilemma he cannot handle, i.e., does not know what to do. The society and its appropriate representative decides how to handle particular situations the individual agent will confront. A lawyer, for example, knows how to defend his client and knows, in particular, not to try to bribe jury members in a trial.

Discussion

Various philosophers in ethics have taken a position that details the requirements for being moral while others have stressed the benefits from being moral. Immanuel Kant argued that one should always do his duty without regard to the consequences of an action. For him, the individual must act in such a way as to demonstrate a rational approach to ethical decision-making. The agent is to treat other human beings as he does himself: with respect; not trying to use any other person but trying to call out rationality from others. He acts from a sense of duty to do the right and honorable thing.

J. S. Mill, on the other hand, argues the Utilitarian position in ethics. For him, the consequences of an act have moral significance in that the agent can take great delight from his moral act. The doctor who heals some patient will find he is glad he entered the medical field. An educator will find pleasure when his class does well on a standard achievement test. That is to say, the individual engaged in actions that benefit himself and his society is economically and psychologically rewarded.

The Social Contract Structure captures both sides of the argument between duty theorists and consequential advocates. For, there is a promise by society that one's abiding by the rules of the social game will result in personal and social gain.

The structure includes elements that are not part of the debate, since we know that the self is ever developing. Concretely, the principle of self development means that the ascriptions of self are open to analysis and change as one's situation becomes altered; yet one's response remains within the bounds of rationality.

I have found personal value in meeting with a psychologist or a social worker regularly during times of change in my life. I review with the experienced professional my past that has gotten me to this point of contemplating the change and seek his counsel pertaining how to make the adjustment in light of my plans for the future. Nevertheless, a review process simply is part of contemplating change in behaviors, whether or not the individual attempts to benefit from the informed advice of some professional.

Occasionally, the social contract is "breached" in the sense that one party or the other fails to live up to its requirements. If society breaches, this would mean that the agent is no longer required to act responsibly--as in the cases of war, pestilence and annihilating physical disasters like a volcanic eruption or meteoric desolation. If the individual breaches, that would entail isolating the individual from society as in the cases of encarceration or being institutionalized.

Typical "check-off" events in one's life that can function in the review process of taking stock of self are: choosing a career, choosing a college, choosing a mate, confronting the mid-life crisis, job loss in persons above age 45, major changes in physical or mental health, bereavement; and entering retirement.

Analyzing ethical and moral issues by casting them into the structure of the social contract represents a radical departure in the field of ethics, for the starting point of analysis is distinctly different: the self in society represented as a contract with particular responsibilities of self and society that should be conducted during an individual's entire lifetime.

The Quest for Social Justice

The quest for social justice is a society's demand upon its government to live up to the terms of the social contract, i.e., do its duty in the performance of the contract.

As I am interpreting John Locke, government is to protect the individual as expressed in his right of freedom. In the American experience this right is stated as the right of the individual to pursue personal happiness. A right is like a natural propensity towards self-preservation, even as conscience is a natural "reminder" to do the morally right thing. In Abraham Maslow's terms, the right of freedom is a bodily striving toward self-actualization, which is to maintain a developed self in harmony with itself and others.

Indeed, it is natural for the citizen to appeal to his government whenever he thinks he is being harmed, or whenever he believes his lot would be improved if some obstacle impeding him in his pursuit of well-being could be overcome through governmental action on his behalf.

Government will not always respond favorably to society's demand for action, however. But it sometimes does, especially if there are many, many in the society who want the same thing. When government does act upon a societal insistence, it does so by instituting some governmental program aimed at meeting the demand to the extent it enhances the individual's well-being.

Mark Latour in his book American Government and the Vision of the Democrats, 2007, sees the social contract as the basis for appealing to government in the social quest for improving the the citizen's quality of life. I think his point of view is the essence of Lockean theory. And we know that throughout history the individual has bettered himself, his living conditions, and his health by reaching out to government, whether tribal or more organized.

Latour discerns that with the thrust to improve comes a societal counter-reaction to hold on to what is and not to rock the boat, so to speak. There certainly is something in everyman to stay the course, and keep doing what has been successful in the past. I think this is also part of the self-preservation "instinct"--not to move too fast so as to sow the seeds of self-destruction. Government doesn't want to go bankrupt through some project it couldn't really afford, either.

Nor does government want to engage in some project of social change without sufficient reason for justifying the program. Justification is in terms of improving the quality of life of the citizenry, as Latour makes explicit. I think Latour's application of the concept of the social contract is profound, but let's see what happens when we apply it to the current political affairs in the US.

The government programs of social security, unemployment insurance, medicare, fair labor laws and OSHA working condition rules are instances of social programs intended to improve the working man's life--signifcantly.

Nonetheless, there exists in the citizenry an adamantly resistant number who protest these programs. For social justice is always a quest from what has been the policies in the past to what are the policies that improve the quality of life henceforth.

Government is also called upon to defend the individual against those powerful groups who would cause him harm or jeopardize his freedom toward self-actualization (to use Maslow's term). To take just one case among a host of instances, the governmental agency PDA stands today as a bulwark against the pressures of the pharmaceutical industry. But to get an agency or department to stand up for the individual, there must a vocerfous outcry!

I close with a personal story. I grew up in an era when many white people believed that blacks were inferior people. Some didn't even want to touch a black, expressing the same fear that today some youth have in touching old people. These whites didn't want their children associating with black kids either.

I think it was not until the IQ testing results conducted by psychologists in the thirties and forties reported in scientific journals demonstrating that white kids and black kids had equal intelligence levels that the Supreme Court could rule with sufficient reason in favor of desegregating the schools. That ruling coupled with the distinguished record blacks achieved in WWII, I believe, led to the Civil Rights "revolution" of the 1960's, embodied in the legislation passed under President Johnson. This achievement is a clear instance of the quest for social justice, as an application of the concept of the social contract: the demands by blacks exercising their civil rights and the response of government in providing remedy to the injustices committed against them for lo these many centuries.

(Interestingly, the government that institutes the social program accrues the benefit of devotion from those who insisted upon it, such that power would greatly be increased to the ruling group.)

Social Contract: Meta-Elements

The term "social contracts" bespeaks a regulatory or monitoring system of human relationships. This understanding dates back to John Locke, who used the term to describe the foundations of government. I am simply extending the term to a variety of human relationships, all of which I believe ought to be systematized for the sake of greater rational control by those involved.

My definition of "social contract" has five elements, stemming from what a contract is. 1) It is a promise of one of the parties to do something that benefits one of the other parties. 2) It requires sufficient consideration--something of value--as recompense for the beneficial action. A wants B to build a garage on A's property. B says he'll do it for $2,300. 3) There is a meeting of the minds. In the case cited, both A and B agree: B is to build the garage; and A promises to pay B $2,300. This creates a legal duty on the parties. 4) There is, stated or implied, an understanding as to what happens if the contract should be breeched, i.e., one or the other party fails to live up to terms of the contract. 5) There is, stated or implied, what constitutes a reasonable time for the contract to be fulfilled. If the contract is of long duration or open-ended, I argue there should be a check-off point, some designated event, at which parties provide feedback pertaining to each's performance (answering the question, "How am I doing?"). Additionally, at this event there must be opportunity to alter the terms of the contract to affect future action.

A social contract need not be written. Nevertheless, each party should recognize a time and place at which the contract's terms should be the topic of discussion. No significant human activity should simply "let slide" without regulation and control by the parties involved.

In sum, the difference between a contract and a social contract is that there is a deliberate effort by each party to improve his performance, where improvement amouts to the recognition that circumstances change during the length of a contract.

Social Contract: Format

I am doing research on the topic of the social contract, as enunciated by John Locke, Thomas Hobbes and developed in the United States by contemporary liberals; and as it appears in the literature on the nature of society and government.

The format consists of posting materials on various reading matter and applying the concept of the social contract.

I think the concept has been woefully underused in the political realm and scarcely at all applied in the social contexts (of course, the notion of contracts is widely used in business transactions).
It is the success in business transactions of contracts that makes it appealing for extensive application, howbeit adapted.

The concept of the social contract is associated with the establishment of government. Hobbes and Locke used the concept to legitimatize the relation between citizen and government, whereby each entity has certain responsibilities and benefits accruing to them. Government, for one, would protect the rights of individual freedom and of his property. In return, the citizen is to abide by the laws of the state. The terms of the agreement were assumed to be set forth in a contract, viz., the country's Constitution. In sum, for these thinkers the concept refers to a one-time affair, the founding of government: the terms of the relation between citizen and his government.

Yet, as John Rawls notes in his book Political Liberalism (2005 edition), a contract can have long duration, as long as the parties live up to the "deal." Contracts of long duration are subject to historical changes. Seemingly, neither Locke nor Hobbes address the historical backdrop of contracts. If they had, they might have argued for periodic review of the social contract.

In a democracy, we are familiar with constitutional conventions, but may not be aware of their value f0r review and evaluation of the Constitution in effect. I suggest that constitutional conventions have merit for just such a purpose.

In business, an employee under contract is subject to annual performance review with the aim to improve the efficiency of the enterprise as it pertains to the employee's job description. Indeed, when a employee anticipates and participates in the performance review, he comes to know "where he stands" with the company. He may take satisfaction in knowing that he is being appreciated and is doing well.

Similarly, there could be a synergy of national pride if constitutional conventions were periodically held.

There might other uses of the social contract in the political arena; and I intend to look for them. One area I am examining is that of social justice, and I will cite a very recent book on liberalism in America, should I be able to make the connection.

In the social realm, the marriage contract is an obvious candidate for applying the meaning of the social contract. What is needed to constitute a social contract in my opinion is a review process. Some married people already have come to the practice of renewing their marriage vows periodically; yet the contract itself does not call for it, so does not constitute a social contract, as I am using the term (following Rawls).

Other possible areas of its use in the social sphere that come readily to mind: education and medicine and ethics. The value of the social contract is it promotes rationality in mankind's affairs to a degree not heretofore afforded! In what follows, I've applied the concept of the social contract to social justice, ethics, education, marriage and medicine.

The influence of Professor Jerry Law, Philosophy, Glendale Community College
In the Fall, 2008, I took an ethics class with Professor Law as Instructor. I became intrigued by his application of the scientific method in first, identifying areas where a philosophical concept was used by particular philosophers and second, finding other areas of life where the concept could usefully be extended so as to gain insight into the concept's power, not merely in explaining human behavior but in giving direction to act even more rationally.

This I take to be the value of the scientific method in social research: to corral a group of studies to form a cognitive theory and then to design further experiments about which the theory has predictive value as to their outcomes. In philosophy, these initial studies are conducted by philosophers who then develop a conceptual schemata for the term's use; which I, as a philosopher, extend to other areas where the term's use determines new ways of doing things that should result in greater rational behaving in the world.

Years ago, I was looking for a conceptual basis for making human action more rational. I was influenced by the linguistic analysts and the phenomenologists, thinking that their programs for analyzing human action could lead to making decision making more rationally founded. But I could not find in these philosophies a method that could impel thought to be even more consistent and logical. Jerry Law's method of applying science to matters of human action seems to better fit what is needed, if mankind can reach even greater levels of rationality in our behaviors.