Skip to main content
Log in

Pluralism, philosophies of medicine and the varieties of medical ethics: A commentary on Thomasma and Pellegrino

  • Published:
Metamedicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Some problems that arise in the account given by Thomasma and Pellegrino [6] of the foundations of medical ethics in a philosophy of medicine are addressed, in particular questions of a conceptual character about treating therelatum of medicine as health. Which concept of health is appropriate and which will bear the burden of the position thomasma and Pellegrino advance? It is argued that the proper relationship of medicine is one between a healer and developing embodied minds. As a consequence, the project of providing a univocal account of the nature of medicine fails. Instead, pluralism infects philosophy and medicine, resulting in different philosophies of medicine. From these philosophies of medicine will follow not a single medical ethics but a variety.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Callahan, D.: ‘Health and society: Some ethics imperatives’, in John Knowles (ed.),Doing Better and Feeling Worse: Health in the United States, W. W. Norton and Co., New York, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Engelhardt, H. T., Jr.: ‘The ontology of abortion’,Ethics,84, (1974) 234.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Engelhardt, H. T., Jr.: ‘Introduction’, in Arthur Caplan, H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr., and James J. McCartney (eds.),Concepts of Health and Disease in Medicine.: Interdisciplinary Perspectives Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kass, L.: ‘Regarding the end of medicine and the pursuit of health’,Public Interest 40, (1975) 11–42.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pellegrino, E. D.: ‘The fact of illness and the act of pro-fession: Some notes on the sources of professional obligation’, in Laurence B. McCullough and James P. Morris (eds.),Implications of History and Ethics to Medicine-Veterinary and Human, Centenial Academic Assemblies, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas, 1978, pp. 78–89.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Thomasma, D. C., and Pellegrino, E. D.: ‘Philosophy of medicine as the source for medical ethics’, this issue.

  7. World Health Organization:World Health Organization: Basic Documents, 26th ed., Geneva, 1976.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McCullough, L.B. Pluralism, philosophies of medicine and the varieties of medical ethics: A commentary on Thomasma and Pellegrino. Metamedicine 2, 13–17 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00886340

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00886340

key words

Navigation