David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Topoi 23 (2):145-152 (2004)
It is almost universally acknowledged that risks have to be weighed against benefits, but there are different ways to perform the weighing. In conventional risk analysis, collectivist risk-weighing is the standard. This means that an option is accepted if the sum of all individual benefits outweighs the sum of all individual risks. In practices originating in clinical medicine, such as ethical appraisals of clinical trials, individualist risk-weighing is the standard. This implies a much stricter criterion for risk acceptance, namely that the risk to which each individual is exposed should be outweighed by benefits for that same individual. The different choices of risk-weighing methods in different policy areas seem to have emerged from traditional thought patterns and social relations, rather than from explicit deliberations on possible justifications for the alternative ways to weigh risks against benefits. It is not obvious how the prevalent differences in risk-weighing practices can be reconstructed in terms of consistent underlying principles of preventive health or social priority-setting.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Fred Gifford (1995). Community-Equipoise and the Ethics of Randomized Clinical Trials. Bioethics 9 (2):127–148.
Sven Ove Hansson (2003). Ethical Criteria of Risk Acceptance. Erkenntnis 59 (3):291 - 309.
Sven Ove Hansson (1993). The False Promises of Risk Analysis. Ratio 6 (1):16-26.
Jason H. T. Karlawish & John Lantos (1997). Community Equipoise and the Architecture of Clinical Research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 6 (4):385-.
Alex John London (2001). Equipose and International Human-Subjects Research. Bioethics 15 (4):312–332.
Citations of this work BETA
Sven Ove Hansson (2010). The Harmful Influence of Decision Theory on Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (5):585-593.
Madeleine Hayenhjelm & Jonathan Wolff (2012). The Moral Problem of Risk Impositions: A Survey of the Literature. European Journal of Philosophy 20 (S1):E1-E142.
Jukka Varelius (2009). Collective Informed Consent and Decision Power. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):39-50.
Christopher Groves (2009). Nanotechnology, Contingency and Finitude. NanoEthics 3 (1):1-16.
Peter G. Modin & Sven Ove Hansson (2011). Moral and Instrumental Norms in Food Risk Communication. Journal of Business Ethics 101 (2):313 - 324.
Similar books and articles
Douglas MacLean (1982). Quantification, Regulation, and Risk Assessment. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:243 - 260.
Sven Ove Hansson (2006). Economic (Ir)Rationality in Risk Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 22 (2):231-241.
Gary E. Marchant, Douglas J. Sylvester & Kenneth W. Abbott (2008). Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 2 (1):43-60.
E. Marchant Gary, J. Sylvester Douglas & W. Abbott Kenneth (2008). Risk Management Principles for Nanotechnology. NanoEthics 2 (1).
Lantz Miller (1998). Filling the Gaps in the Risks Vs. Benefits of Mammalian Adult-Cell Cloning: Taking Bernard Rollin's Philosophy its Next Step. [REVIEW] Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 11 (1):1-16.
Béatrice Rey (2003). Total and Partial Bivariate Risk Premia: An Extension. Theory and Decision 55 (1):59-69.
Alan Petersen & Alison Anderson (2007). A Question of Balance or Blind Faith?: Scientists' and Science Policymakers' Representations of the Benefits and Risks of Nanotechnologies. [REVIEW] NanoEthics 1 (3):243-256.
Janet Malek (2007). Understanding Risks and Benefits in Research on Reproductive Genetic Technologies. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (4):339 – 358.
Charles Weijer, The Ethical Analysis of Risks and Potential Benefits in Human Subjects Research: History, Theory, and Implications for U.S. Regulation.
Annette Rid & David Wendler (2011). A Framework for Risk-Benefit Evaluations in Biomedical Research. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 21 (2):141-179.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads31 ( #61,887 of 1,168,017 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #60,802 of 1,168,017 )
How can I increase my downloads?