Graduate studies at Western
Hastings Center Report 35 (6):20-30 (2005)
|Abstract||: Most of the world now accepts the idea, first proposed four decades ago, that death means "brain death." But the idea has always been open to criticism because it doesn't square with all of our intuitions about death. In fact, none of the possible definitions of death quite works. Death, perhaps surprisingly, eludes definition, and "brain death" can be accepted only as a refinement of what is in fact a fuzzy concept|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Royce P. Jones (1985). The Logical Status of Brain Death Criteria. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10 (4):387-396.
Kazumasa Hoshino (1993). Legal Status of Brain Death in Japan: Why Many Japanese Do Not Accept "Brain Death" as a Definition of Death. Bioethics 7 (2-3):234-238.
Brooke Alan Trisel (2007). What is a Premature Death? Minerva - An Internet Journal of Philosophy 11:54-82.
T. Forcht Dagi & Rebecca Kaufman (2001). Clarifying the Discussion on Brain Death. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (5):503 – 525.
Mike Nair-Collins (2010). Death, Brain Death, and the Limits of Science: Why the Whole-Brain Concept of Death Is a Flawed Public Policy. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (3):667-683.
Masahiro Morioka (2001). Reconsidering Brain Death: A Lesson From Japan's Fifteen Years of Experience. Hastings Center Report 31 (4):41-46.
Ari Joffe (2010). Are Recent Defences of the Brain Death Concept Adequate? Bioethics 24 (2):47-53.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads78 ( #12,533 of 740,210 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 740,210 )
How can I increase my downloads?