'Nobody tosses a dwarf!' The relation between the empirical and the normative reexamined

Bioethics 23 (4):226-235 (2009)
Abstract
This article discusses the relation between empirical and normative approaches in bioethics. The issue of dwarf tossing, while admittedly unusual, is chosen as a point of departure because it challenges the reader to look with fresh eyes upon several central bioethical themes, including human dignity, autonomy, and the protection of vulnerable people. After an overview of current approaches to the integration of empirical and normative ethics, we consider five ways that the empirical and normative can be brought together to speak to the problem of dwarf tossing: prescriptive applied ethics, theoretical ethics, critical applied ethics, particularist ethics and integrated empirical ethics. We defend a position of critical applied ethics that allows for a two-way relation between empirical and normative theories. Against efforts fully to integrate the normative and the empirical into one synthesis, we propose that the two should stand in tension and relation to one another. The approach we endorse acknowledges that a social practice can and should be judged both by the gathering of empirical data and by normative ethics. Critical applied ethics uses a five stage process that includes: (a) determination of the problem, (b) description of the problem, (c) empirical study of effects and alternatives, (d) normative weighing and (e) evaluation of the effects of a decision. In each stage, we explore the perspective from both the empirical (sociological) and the normative ethical point of view. We conclude by applying our five-stage critical applied ethics to the example of dwarf tossing.
Keywords empirical  theory  bioethics  methodology
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01711.x
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 25,136
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Criteria for Authorship in Bioethics.David B. Resnik & Zubin Master - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics 11 (10):17 - 21.
Analyzing Dignity: A Perspective From the Ethics of Care.Carlo Leget - 2013 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 16 (4):945-952.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Empirical Research on Research Ethics.Joan E. Sieber - 2004 - Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):397 – 412.
Normative and Empirical Business Ethics.Linda Klebe Trevino - 1994 - Business Ethics Quarterly 4 (2):129-143.
Empirical Ethics, Context-Sensitivity, and Contextualism.Albert W. Musschenga - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (5):467 – 490.
Paradigms Linked.M. S. Singer - 1998 - Business Ethics Quarterly 8 (3):481-496.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-03-29

Total downloads

53 ( #93,536 of 2,132,955 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #387,667 of 2,132,955 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums