David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (1):39-58 (2006)
: Bernard Gert's theory of morality has received much critical attention, but there has been relatively little commentary on its practical value for bioethics. An important test of an ethical theory is its ability to yield results that are helpful and plausible when applied to real cases. An examination of Gert's theory and his own attempts to apply it to bioethics cases reveals that there are serious difficulties with regard to its application. These problems are sufficiently severe to support the conclusion that Gert's theory is unacceptable as an approach for resolving bioethics cases, even relatively noncontroversial cases
|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
John D. Arras (2009). The Hedgehog and the Borg: Common Morality in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):11-30.
Bernard Gert (1998). Morality: Its Nature and Justification. Oxford University Press.
Darleen Douglas-Steele & Edward M. Hundert (1996). Accounting for Context: Future Directions in Bioethics Theory and Research. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 17 (2).
Ana Smith Iltis (2000). Bioethics as Methodological Case Resolution: Specification, Specified Principlism and Casuistry. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):271 – 284.
Jakob Elster (2011). How Outlandish Can Imaginary Cases Be? Journal of Applied Philosophy 28 (3):241-258.
B. Andrew Lustig (1992). The Method of 'Principlism': A Critique of the Critique. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.
Bernard Gert (1988). Morality: A New Justification of the Moral Rules. Oxford University Press.
Bernard Gert (2006). Making the Morally Relevant Features Explicit: A Response to Carson Strong. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (1):59-71.
Andrew Alexandra & Seumas Miller (2009). Ethical Theory, “Common Morality,” and Professional Obligations. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):69-80.
Carson Strong (2006). Continuing the Dialogue: A Reply to Bernard Gert. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 16 (2):189-194.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #174,675 of 1,781,419 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #207,207 of 1,781,419 )
How can I increase my downloads?