- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Purely Faith-Based vs. Rationally-Informed Theological Bioethics
American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):14-16 (2020)
Abstract
Commentary on re-opening dialogue between theological and secular voices in bioethics.Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
There’s No Harm in Talking: Re-Establishing the Relationship Between Theological and Secular Bioethics.Michael McCarthy, Mary Homan & Michael Rozier - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):5-13.
Talking at Cross Purposes: Why We Shouldn’t Re-Establish the Relationship Between Theological and Secular Bioethics.Heidi Matisonn - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):45-47.
The Nature of Human Persons: Metaphysics and Bioethics by Jason T. Eberl.Bryan Pilkington - 2021 - Review of Metaphysics 74 (3):404-406.
The Social Context of Religion in the Jurisdictions of Bioethics.John H. Evans - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):1-4.
The Nature of the Human Person: Metaphysics and Bioethics by Jason T. Eberl. [REVIEW]Brian Kemple - 2022 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 22 (3):571-574.
Thomistic Principles and Bioethics, by Jason T. Eberl.David B. Hershenov - 2008 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 8 (1):191-194.
What’s Missing in Secular Bioethics? The False Dichotomy between “the Secular” and “the Theological”.Isabel Roldán Gómez - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):34-37.
‘There’s No Harm in Talking’…True…But It Depends on How We Talk and What We Then Do.Patrick T. Smith - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):32-34.
Talking Can Be Harmful Depending on What You Say.Cynthia M. A. Geppert & Toby Schonfeld - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):42-44.
Community, Complicity, and Critique: Christian Concepts in Secular Bioethics.Aline H. Kalbian, Courtney S. Campbell & James F. Childress - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):37-39.
Analytics
Added to PP
2020-11-17
Downloads
17 (#864,680)
6 months
10 (#383,634)
2020-11-17
Downloads
17 (#864,680)
6 months
10 (#383,634)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Metaphysics, Reason, and Religion in Secular Clinical Ethics.Jason T. Eberl - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (6):17-18.
Response to Open Peer Commentaries for “There’s No Harm in Talking: Reestablishing the Relationship Between Theological and Secular Bioethics”.Michael McCarthy, Mary Homan & Michael Rozier - 2021 - American Journal of Bioethics 21 (1):W1-W3.
The Social Context of Religion in the Jurisdictions of Bioethics.John H. Evans - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):1-4.
References found in this work
Doctors Have no Right to Refuse Medical Assistance in Dying, Abortion or Contraception.Julian Savulescu & Udo Schuklenk - 2017 - Bioethics 30 (9):162-170.
There’s No Harm in Talking: Re-Establishing the Relationship Between Theological and Secular Bioethics.Michael McCarthy, Mary Homan & Michael Rozier - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (12):5-13.
Protecting reasonable conscientious refusals in health care.Jason T. Eberl - 2019 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 40 (6):565-581.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-6686886f5-kkm7k uwo