Graduate studies at Western
Neuroethics 4 (3):251-259 (2011)
|Abstract||Clinical neuroethics and neuroskepticism are recent entrants to the vocabulary of neuroethics. Clinical neuroethics has been used to distinguish problems of clinical relevance arising from developments in brain science from problems arising in neuroscience research proper. Neuroskepticism has been proposed as a counterweight to claims about the value and likely implications of developments in neuroscience. These two emergent streams of thought intersect within the practice of neurology. Neurologists face many traditional problems in bioethics, like end of life care in the persistent vegetative state, determination of capacity in progressive dementia, and requests for assisted suicide in cognition-preserving neurodegenerative disease (like amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). Neurologists also look to be at the forefront of downstream clinical applications of neuroscience, like pharmacological enhancement of mental life. At the same time, the practice of neurology, concerned primarily with the structure, function, and treatment of the nervous system, has historically fostered a kind of skeptical attitude toward its own subject matter. Not all problems that appear primarily neurological are primarily neurological. This disciplinary skepticism is generally clinical in orientation and limited in scope. The rise of interest in clinical neuroethics and in neuroskepticsim generally suggests a possible broader application. The clinical skepticism of neurology provides impetus for thinking about the appropriate role for skepticism in clinical areas of neuroethics. After a brief review of neuroskepticism and clinical neuroethics, a taxonomy of clinical neuroskepticism is offered and reasons why a stronger rather than weaker form of clinical neuroskepticism is currently warranted|
|Keywords||Neuroethics Neuroskepticism Neurology Clinical ethics Clinical neuroethics Neuroscience|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Laurence B. McCullough (2005). The Critical Turn in Clinical Ethics and its Continous Enhancement. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (1):1 – 8.
Riekeder Graaf & Johannes J. M. Delden (forthcoming). On Using People Merely as a Means in Clinical Research. Bioethics.
Lynn A. Jansen (1998). Assessing Clinical Pragmatism. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 8 (1):23-36.
Peter Singer, Edmund Pellegrino & Mark Siegler (2001). Clinical Ethics Revisited. BMC Medical Ethics 2 (1):1-8.
Rieke van der Graaf & Johannes J. M. van Delden (2012). On Using People Merely as a Means in Clinical Research. Bioethics 26 (2):76-83.
George J. Agich (2005). What Kind of Doing is Clinical Ethics? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (1):7-24.
William E. Stempsey (2009). Clinical Reasoning: New Challenges. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (3):173-179.
Mary Ann Gardell Cutter (1990). Negotiating Criteria and Setting Limits: The Case of Aids. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 11 (3).
Jos V. M. Welie (1998). Clinical Ethics: Theory or Practice? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (3):295-312.
John Puma & David L. Schiedermayer (1991). The Clinical Ethicist at the Bedside. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 12 (2).
L. B. McCullough (2013). Critical Appraisal of Clinical Judgment: An Essential Dimension of Clinical Ethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 38 (1):1-5.
Peter Hucklenbroich (1998). Steps Towards a Theory of Medical Practice. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (3):215-228.
Kathryn Montgomery (2006). How Doctors Think: Clinical Judgment and the Practice of Medicine. Oxford University Press.
J. Hughes & T. Walker (2009). The Rule of Rescue in Clinical Practice. Clinical Ethics 4 (1):50-54.
Stephen L. Daniel (1994). Hermeneutical Clinical Ethics: A Commentary. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (2).
Added to index2010-11-18
Total downloads12 ( #101,301 of 740,279 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,802 of 740,279 )
How can I increase my downloads?