|Abstract||In the latest edition of Principles of Biomedical Ethics , Tom Beauchamp and James Childress provide an expanded discussion of the ethical theory underlying their treatment of issues in medical ethics. Balancing judgements remain central to their method, as does the contention that such judgements are more than intuitive. This theory is developed precisely in response to the common skepticism directed at "principlism" in medical ethics. Such skepticism includes the claim that moral reasoning comes to a dead halt when confronted by competing conflicts between moral norms in a given pluralistic situation. In this paper, I use examples from the text to show that despite the authors’s arguments to the contrary, balancing judgements are the product of unreasoned intuitions. Given the necessity of some such judgements in any principle based system, my argument highlights the degree to which principled ethical reasoning rests upon an arational core|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
J. R. Karlsen & J. H. Solbakk (2011). A Waste of Time: The Problem of Common Morality in Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (10):588-591.
Henry S. Richardson (2000). Specifying, Balancing, and Interpreting Bioethical Principles. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):285 – 307.
Oliver Rauprich (2008). Common Morality: Comment on Beauchamp and Childress. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):43-71.
Tom L. Beauchamp (1994). Principles of Biomedical Ethics / Tom L. Beauchamp, James F. Childress. Oxford University Press.
Heike Schmidt-Felzmann (2003). Pragmatic Principles - Methodological Pragmatism in the Principle-Based Approach to Bioethics. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (5 & 6):581 – 596.
B. Andrew Lustig (1992). The Method of 'Principlism': A Critique of the Critique. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510.
P. Herissone-Kelly (2011). Determining the Common Morality's Norms in the Sixth Edition of Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (10):584-587.
Tom Sorell (2011). The Limits of Principlism and Recourse to Theory: The Example of Telecare. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):369-382.
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.
O. Rauprich & J. Vollmann (2011). 30 Years Principles of Biomedical Ethics: Introduction to a Symposium on the 6th Edition of Tom L Beauchamp and James F Childress' Seminal Work. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (8):454-455.
David DeGrazia (2003). Common Morality, Coherence, and the Principles of Biomedical Ethics. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):219-230.
Mette Ebbesen (2010). Different Approaches to Principles of Biomedical Ethics : A Philosophical Analysis and Discussion of the Theories of the American Ethicists Tom L. Beauchamp & James F. Childress and the Danish Philosophers Jakob Rendtorff & Peter Kemp. In Tyler N. Pace (ed.), Bioethics: Issues and Dilemmas. Nova Science Publishers.
Katie Page (2012). The Four Principles: Can They Be Measured and Do They Predict Ethical Decision Making? BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):10-.
S. Holm (2002). Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 5th Edn.: Beauchamp T L, Childress J F. Oxford University Press, 2001, Pound19.95, Pp 454. ISBN 0-19-514332-. [REVIEW] Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (5):332-a-332.
Roberta Sala (2003). Contextualistic Critiques of the Principle-Based Approach to Bioethics. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 3 (2):187-198.
Added to index2010-11-24
Total downloads32 ( #37,982 of 549,196 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,196 )
How can I increase my downloads?