Zones of Consensus and Zones of Conflict: Questioning the "Common Morality" Presumption in Bioethics
Graduate studies at Western
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):193-218 (2003)
|Abstract||: Many bioethicists assume that morality is in a state of wide reflective equilibrium. According to this model of moral deliberation, public policymaking can build upon a core common morality that is pretheoretical and provides a basis for practical reasoning. Proponents of the common morality approach to moral deliberation make three assumptions that deserve to be viewed with skepticism. First, they commonly assume that there is a universal, transhistorical common morality that can serve as a normative baseline for judging various actions and practices. Second, advocates of the common morality approach assume that the common morality is in a state of relatively stable, ordered, wide reflective equilibrium. Third, casuists, principlists, and other proponents of common morality approaches assume that the common morality can serve as a basis for the specification of particular policies and practical recommendations. These three claims fail to recognize the plural moral traditions that are found in multicultural, multiethnic, multifaith societies such as the United States and Canada. A more realistic recognition of multiple moral traditions in pluralist societies would be considerably more skeptical about the contributions that common morality approaches in bioethics can make to resolving contentious moral issues|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew Alexandra & Seumas Miller (2009). Ethical Theory, “Common Morality,” and Professional Obligations. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):69-80.
Mark G. Kuczewski (2009). The Common Morality in Communitarian Thought: Reflective Consensus in Public Policy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):45-54.
Carson Strong (2008). Justifying Group-Specific Common Morality. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (1):1-15.
Ronald A. Lindsay (2005). Slaves, Embryos, and Nonhuman Animals: Moral Status and the Limitations of Common Morality Theory. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 15 (4):323-346.
John D. Arras (2009). The Hedgehog and the Borg: Common Morality in Bioethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):11-30.
K. A. Wallace (2009). Common Morality and Moral Reform. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):55-68.
Jeffrey Brand-Ballard (2003). Consistency, Common Morality, and Reflective Equilibrium. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13 (3):231-258.
Bernard Gert (1999). Common Morality and Computing. Ethics and Information Technology 1 (1):53-60.
Ronald A. Lindsay (2009). Bioethics Policies and the Compass of Common Morality. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 30 (1):31-43.
Leigh Turner (2003). Bioethics in a Multicultural World: Medicine and Morality in Pluralistic Settings. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 11 (2):99-117.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #86,056 of 739,395 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 739,395 )
How can I increase my downloads?