Deciding Together: Bioethics and Moral Consensus
Graduate studies at Western
Oxford University Press (1995)
|Abstract||Western society today is less unified by a set of core values than ever before. Undoubtedly, the concept of moral consensus is a difficult one in a liberal, democratic and pluralistic society. But it is imperative to avoid a rigid majoritarianism where sensitive personal values are at stake, as in bioethics. Bioethics has become an influential part of public and professional discussions of health care. It has helped frame issues of moral values and medicine as part of a more general effort to find consensus about some of the most perplexing questions of our time. But why is it thought that a moral consensus is important or that it deserves respect? How does moral consensus acquire legitimacy in a society that includes diverse value systems? How is moral consensus possible and how do small groups help create or distort consensus processes? Written by a medical school professor trained in philosophy, this timely work tackles these questions from philosophical, historical, and social scientific standpoints. It begins by describing the traditional ambivalence about consensus in Western culture as well as the uncertain relationship in modernity between consensus and expertise. After outlining the current bioethical consensus, the book gives philosophical and political analyses of the idea of consensus, then assesses the role of consensus in national ethics commissions and in the ethics committee movement. Moreno constructs an original, naturalistic philosophy of moral consensus, referred to as "bioethical naturalism", and then applies sociology and social psychology to actual consensus processes. The book concludes with an account of bioethics as a consensus-oriented social reform movement. This insightful volume will be essential reading for bioethicists, philosophers, physicians, members of ethics committees, and all those concerned with ethical and social issues in health care.|
|Keywords||Bioethics Medical ethics committees|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$173.93 used $299.51 new Amazon page|
|Call number||R724.M677 1995|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Aviezer Tucker (2003). The Epistemic Significance of Consensus. Inquiry 46 (4):501 – 521.
Bruce Jennings (1991). Possibilities of Consensus: Toward Democratic Moral Discourse. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):447-463.
Jonathan D. Moreno (1991). Consensus, Contracts, and Committees. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):393-408.
Ellen H. Moskowitz (1996). Moral Consensus in Public Ethics: Patient Autonomy and Family Decisionmaking in the Work of One State Bioethics Commission. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 21 (2):149-168.
M. J. Charlesworth (1993). Bioethics in a Liberal Society. Cambridge University Press.
H. Tristram Engelhardt (ed.) (2006). Global Bioethics: The Collapse of Consensus. M & M Scrivener Press.
Rosemarie Tong (1991). The Epistemology and Ethics of Consensus: Uses and Misuses of 'Ethical' Expertise. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):409-426.
Peter Caws (1991). Committees and Consensus: How Many Heads Are Better Than One? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):375-391.
Robert M. Veatch (1991). Consensus of Expertise: The Role of Consensus of Experts in Formulating Public Policy and Estimating Facts. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):427-445.
Jonathan D. Moreno (1988). Ethics by Committee: The Moral Authority of Consensus. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (4):411-432.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?