Moving forward in bioethical theory: Theories, cases, and specified principlism
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):511-539 (1992)
| Abstract | The field of bioethics has deployed different models of justification for particular moral judgments. The best known models are those of deductivism, casuistry, and principlism (under one, rather limited interpretation). Each of these models, however, has significant difficulties that are explored in this essay. An alternative model, suggested by the work of Henry Richardson, is presented. It is argued that specified principlism is the most promising model of justification in bioethics. Keywords: casuistry, deductivism, ethical theories, intuition principlism, specified principlism, specification CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,875 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJohn-Stewart Gordon (2011). Global Ethics and Principlism. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (3):251-276.
Benjamin H. Levi (1996). Four Approaches to Doing Ethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (1):7-39.
Bernard Gert (1990). A Critique of Principlism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 15 (2).
K. Danner Clouser (1993). The Method of Public Morality Versus the Method of Principlism. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (5).
Mark Kuczewski (1998). Casuistry and Principlism: The Convergence of Method in Biomedical Ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (6).
B. Andrew Lustig (1992). The Method of 'Principlism': A Critique of the Critique. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.
Bernard Gert, Charles M. Culver & K. Danner Clouser (2000). Common Morality Versus Specified Principlism: Reply to Richardson. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):308 – 322.
Ana Smith Iltis (2000). Bioethics as Methodological Case Resolution: Specification, Specified Principlism and Casuistry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):271 – 284.
Michael Quante & Andreas Vieth (2002). Defending Principlism Well Understood. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6):621 – 649.
Carson Strong (2000). Specified Principlism: What is It, and Does It Really Resolve Cases Better Than Casuistry? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):323 – 341.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-08-22Total downloads42 ( #27,605 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
