David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):285 – 307 (2000)
The notion that it is useful to specify norms progressively in order to resolve doubts about what to do, which I developed initially in a 1990 article, has been only partly assimilated by the bioethics literature. The thought is not just that it is helpful to work with relatively specific norms. It is more than that: specification can replace deductive subsumption and balancing. Here I argue against two versions of reliance on balancing that are prominent in recent bioethical discussions. Without meaning to address the substance or the overall merits of either view I criticize, I attack Gert, Culver and Clouser's implicit reliance on some overall dimension of balancing as a basis of resolving conflicts among norms and Beauchamp and Childress's residual acceptance of 'justified balancing'. The former authors' description of resolving conflicts depends upon a type of value commensurability that (as they otherwise seem to admit) does not obtain, while the latter authors' role for justified balancing would be better served by continued specification.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
G. Collste (2011). Specifying Rights: The Case of TRIPS. Public Health Ethics 4 (1):63-69.
Anders Nordgren (2012). Remote Monitoring or Close Encounters? Ethical Considerations in Priority Setting Regarding Telecare. Health Care Analysis:1-15.
Similar books and articles
Daniel J. Mahoney (2006). Ethics and the School Administrator: Balancing Today's Complex Issues. Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Robert M. Steele (1987). Video Ethics: The Dilemma of Value Balancing. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 2 (2):7 – 17.
Eveline T. Feteris (2008). The Rational Reconstruction of Weighing and Balancing on the Basis of Teleological-Evaluative Considerations in the Justification of Judicial Decisions. Ratio Juris 21 (4):481-495.
Jan-R. Sieckmann (2003). Why Non-Monotonic Logic is Inadequate to Represent Balancing Arguments. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):211-219.
Moshe Cohen-Eliya & Iddo Porat, American Balancing and German Proportionality: The Historical Origins.
Jacco Bomhoff, Balancing, the Global and the Local: Judicial Balancing as a Problematic Topic in Comparative (Constitutional) Law.
Joseph P. Demarco & Paul J. Ford (2006). Balancing in Ethical Deliberation: Superior to Specification and Casuistry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 31 (5):483 – 497.
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads38 ( #38,135 of 1,088,833 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,666 of 1,088,833 )
How can I increase my downloads?