David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (9):525-528 (2010)
For many, Thomas Beauchamp and James Childress have elaborated moral reasoning by using the four principles whereby all substantive problems of medical ethics (and of ethics more generally) can be properly analysed and cogent philosophical solutions for the problems can be found. It seems that their ‘principlism’ gets updated, with better features being added during the course of the six editions of Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Nonetheless, Beauchamp and Childress seem to have been losing their way when it comes to the common-morality justification, which is the epistemological (and perhaps metaphysical) backbone of their method, and this is shown more vividly in their most recent (2009) edition of Principles of Biomedical Ethics. The author points out what he calls the problem of ‘thick in status, thin in content’ in principlism. The problem exists because principlism cannot adequately explain how the prescriptive sense of common morality it supports is consistent with the existence of what Beauchamp and Childress call the ‘legitimate moral diversity in the world’. Because of this problem, first, the practical end that principlism allegedly accomplishes (ie, providing practical moral guidelines in a relatively ‘thick’ content, based on common morality) is frustrated, and, second, principlism makes itself the method of common morality de jure and of moral pluralism de facto
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
B. Andrew Lustig (1992). The Method of 'Principlism': A Critique of the Critique. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.
Tom Sorell (2011). The Limits of Principlism and Recourse to Theory: The Example of Telecare. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):369-382.
Ben Kotzee & Jeremy Wanderer (2008). Introduction: A Thicker Epistemology? Philosophical Papers 37 (3):337-343.
Matti Eklund (2011). What Are Thick Concepts? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (1):25-49.
Pekka Väyrynen (2008). Slim Epistemology with a Thick Skin. Philosophical Papers 37 (3):389-412.
Richard B. Davis (1995). The Principlism Debate: A Critical Overview. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1):85-105.
Laredaction (2008). Beauchamp Et Childress, 2008 Les Principes de l'Éthique Biomédicale. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. 39 Éd. Les Belles Lettres: Paris (2008). P. 644. Traduit de L'Américain. [REVIEW] Médecine and Droit 2008 (89):59-59.
Brent G. Kyle (2013). How Are Thick Terms Evaluative? Philosophers' Imprint 13 (1):1-20.
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.
Peter Koepke & Juan Carlos Martínez (1995). Superatomic Boolean Algebras Constructed From Morasses. Journal of Symbolic Logic 60 (3):940-951.
April Flakne (2005). Through Thick and Thin: Validity and Reflective Judgment. Hypatia 20 (3):115-126.
Sunny Yang (2008). Moral Emotions and Thick Ethical Concepts. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 10:469-479.
Oliver Rauprich (2008). Common Morality: Comment on Beauchamp and Childress. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):43-71.
Daniel Y. Elstein & Thomas Hurka (2009). From Thick to Thin: Two Moral Reduction Plans. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (4):pp. 515-535.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads12 ( #120,937 of 1,096,449 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #231,754 of 1,096,449 )
How can I increase my downloads?