https://researchopenworld.com/ethics-of-belief-and-ethics-of-ambiguity-demystifying-the-ethics-of-the-usphs-syphilis-study-at-tuskegee-1/#

One of the lead physicians defending the “United States Public Health Service Study at Tuskegee of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male” was Dr. John C. Cutler. His defense of the study was (roughly) because the benefits to society in general, and the black community in particular, far outweighed any corresponding risks or harms. His moral judgment controverted the large number of thoughtful essayists decrying the Study as a straightforwardly and racist dehumanizing of men, women, and families. In this essay, I seek to show two things. First, I seek to show how an action or event done at a particular time may lack the objectivity that comes with distanciation, thus a (malicious) systemic distortion may be ambiguously reducible to a historical error, especially if there is no critical theory borne from critical reflection to hold the action or event morally accountable. Second, I show how two things should be apparent with disambiguation of the historical narrative and with critical reflection: 1) an ethic of ambiguity (and the integrity thereof) should demand that moral propositions be critically assessed at the time of an action or event from more than one angle to ensure the protection of all humans, especially historically marginalized individuals and groups; 2) an ethic of belief, given its Intentionality and intentions, should understand its inherent vulnerabilities and accentuate the import of evidence in moral epistemology. USPHS A young boy and his mother stood viewing a museum art piece depicting a man slaying a lion. Looking incredulous, the boy argued, “Mama, everyone knows that a man can’t beat a lion.” The mother prudentially responded, “Yes, but remember son, it was a man who painted the picture.” – anonymous source … there can be mutual reinforcement between an explanation and what it explains. Not only does a supposed truth gain credibility if we can think of something that would explain it, but also conversely: an explanation gains credibility if it accounts for something we supposed to be true. – Quine and Ullian The Web of Belief.