An apology for socratic bioethics
American Journal of Bioethics 8 (7):3 – 7 (2008)
| Abstract | Bioethics is a hybrid discipline. As a theoretical enterprise it stands for untrammeled inquiry and argument. Yet it aims to influence medical practice and policy. In this article we explore tensions between these two dimensions of bioethics and examine the merits and perils of a “Socratic” approach to bioethics that challenges “the conventional wisdom.”. | |||||||||
| 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 articlesDaniel Sperling (2008). Law and Bioethics : A Rights-Based Relationship and its Troubling Implications. In Michael D. A. Freeman (ed.), Law and Bioethics / Edited by Michael Freeman. Oxford University Press.
Thomas C. Brickhouse (2010). Socratic Moral Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
H. Tristram Engelhardt (1996). The Foundations of Bioethics. Oxford University Press, USA.
Robyn Bluhm (2011). Feminist Bioethics: At the Center, on the Margins. [REVIEW] International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 4 (2).
Carolyn Ells (2010). The Ethics of Bioethics: Mapping the Moral Landscape. International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 3 (2).
Renée C. Fox (2008). Observing Bioethics. Oxford University Press.
Elizabeth F. Cooke (2003). On the Possibility of a Pragmatic Discourse Bioethics: Putnam, Habermas, and the Normative Logic of Bioethical Inquiry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (5 & 6):635 – 653.
Angus Dawson (2010). The Future of Bioethics: Three Dogmas and a Cup of Hemlock. Bioethics 24 (5):218-225.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads11 ( #100,810 of 556,837 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
