David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):409-426 (1991)
In this paper I examine the epistemology and ethics of consensus, focusing on the ways in which decision makers use/misuse ethical expertise. The major questions I raise and tentative answers I give are the following: First, are the ‘experts’ really experts? My tentative answer is that they are bona fide experts who often represent specific interest groups. Second, is the experts' authority merely epistemological or is it also ethical? My tentative answer is that the experts' authority consists not only in their command over specific matters of fact and/or value, but also in their ability to achieve ‘consensus’ about what is ‘true’/‘false’, or ‘right’/‘wrong’. Third, should the authority of expertise be limited? My tentative answer is that it should be limited in the area of facts but especially in the area of values. Persons who are ethics ‘experts’ must be particularly careful to practice an ethics of persuasion rather than an ethics of compulsion . Their role is not to force their group consensus upon decision makers' individual moral perceptions and deliberations; rather it is to help decision makers come to their own conclusions about what they ought to do. Keywords: authority of expertise, consensus, ethics committees, ethics of persuasion, NIH consensus development conferences CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
|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
H. Tristram Engelhardt (2011). Core Competencies for Health Care Ethics Consultants: In Search of Professional Status in a Post-Modern World. HEC Forum 23 (3):129-145.
Similar books and articles
Katie Steele, Helen M. Regan, Mark Colyvan & Mark A. Burgman (2007). Right Decisions or Happy Decision-Makers? Social Epistemology 21 (4):349 – 368.
Bruce D. Weinstein (1993). What is an Expert? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (1).
Michael Cholbi (2007). Moral Expertise and the Credentials Problem. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (4):323-334.
Peter Caws (1991). Committees and Consensus: How Many Heads Are Better Than One? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):375-391.
Paul L. Glezen (1998). In Search of Experts. Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (1):105-126.
Matthias Kaiser & Ellen-Marie Forsberg (2002). Consensus Conference on Environmental Values in Radiation Protection: A Report on Building Consensus Among Experts. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):593-602.
Bruce Jennings (1991). Possibilities of Consensus: Toward Democratic Moral Discourse. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (4):447-463.
Jonathan D. Moreno (1988). Ethics by Committee: The Moral Authority of Consensus. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (4):411-432.
Bruce D. Weinstein (1994). The Possibility of Ethical Expertise. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (1):1-187.
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.
Added to index2010-08-22
Total downloads8 ( #256,695 of 1,707,731 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #352,634 of 1,707,731 )
How can I increase my downloads?