David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 23 (4):236-248 (2009)
In this article, we present a dialogical approach to empirical ethics, based upon hermeneutic ethics and responsive evaluation. Hermeneutic ethics regards experience as the concrete source of moral wisdom. In order to gain a good understanding of moral issues, concrete detailed experiences and perspectives need to be exchanged. Within hermeneutic ethics dialogue is seen as a vehicle for moral learning and developing normative conclusions. Dialogue stands for a specific view on moral epistemology and methodological criteria for moral inquiry. Responsive evaluation involves a structured way of setting up dialogical learning processes, by eliciting stories of participants, exchanging experiences in (homogeneous and heterogeneous) groups and drawing normative conclusions for practice. By combining these traditions we develop both a theoretical and a practical approach to empirical ethics, in which ethical issues are addressed and shaped together with stakeholders in practice. Stakeholders' experiences are not only used as a source for reflection by the ethicist; stakeholders are involved in the process of reflection and analysis, which takes place in a dialogue between participants in practice, facilitated by the ethicist. This dialogical approach to empirical ethics may give rise to questions such as: What contribution does the ethicist make? What role does ethical theory play? What is the relationship between empirical research and ethical theory in the dialogical process? In this article, these questions will be addressed by reflecting upon a project in empirical ethics that was set up in a dialogical way. The aim of this project was to develop and implement normative guidelines with and within practice, in order to improve the practice concerning coercion and compulsion in psychiatry.
|Keywords||psychiatry coercion empirical ethics hermeneutic ethics responsive evaluation|
|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
Michael Dunn, Mark Sheehan, Tony Hope & Michael Parker (2012). Toward Methodological Innovation in Empirical Ethics Research. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (04):466-480.
Stella Reiter-Theil (2012). What Does Empirical Research Contribute to Medical Ethics? Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (04):425-435.
Brent Daniel Mittelstadt, Bernd Carsten Stahl & N. Ben Fairweather (2015). How to Shape a Better Future? Epistemic Difficulties for Ethical Assessment and Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (5):1027-1047.
Sabine Salloch, Sebastian Wäscher, Jochen Vollmann & Jan Schildmann (2015). The Normative Background of Empirical-Ethical Research: First Steps Towards a Transparent and Reasoned Approach in the Selection of an Ethical Theory. BMC Medical Ethics 16 (1):20.
Guy Widdershoven, Bert Molewijk & Tineke Abma (2009). Improving Care and Ethics: A Plea for Interactive Empirical Ethics. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (6):99-101.
Similar books and articles
Sebastian Schleidgen, Michael C. Jungert & Robert H. Bauer (2010). Mission: Impossible? On Empirical-Normative Collaboration in Ethical Reasoning. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 13 (1):59-73.
Henk A. M. J. Ten Have & Annique Lelie (1998). Medical Ethics Research Between Theory and Practice. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (3).
Bjørn Hofmann, Anne Myhr & Søren Holm (2013). Scientific Dishonesty—a Nationwide Survey of Doctoral Students in Norway. BMC Medical Ethics 14 (1):1-9.
Guy Widdershoven (ed.) (2008). Empirical Ethics in Psychiatry. Oxford University Press.
F. C. Weidema, T. A. Abma, G. A. M. Widdershoven & A. C. Molewijk (2011). Client Participation in Moral Case Deliberation: A Precarious Relational Balance. [REVIEW] HEC Forum 23 (3):207-224.
Rouven Porz, Elleke Landeweer & Guy Widdershoven (2011). Theory and Practice of Clinical Ethics Support Services: Narrative and Hermeneutical Perspectives. Bioethics 25 (7):354-360.
Abraham Rudnick (2002). The Ground of Dialogical Bioethics. Health Care Analysis 10 (4):391-402.
Martine de Vries & Evert van Leeuwen (2010). Reflective Equilibrium and Empirical Data: Third Person Moral Experiences in Empirical Medical Ethics. Bioethics 24 (9):490 - 498.
Evert Leeuwen Martine de Vrievans (forthcoming). Reflective Equilibrium and Empirical Data: Third Person Moral Experiences in Empirical Medical Ethics. Bioethics.
Added to index2009-03-29
Total downloads33 ( #105,892 of 1,780,586 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #291,765 of 1,780,586 )
How can I increase my downloads?