Bioethics 23 (4):226-235 (2009)
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)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
“What the Patient Wants…”: Lay Attitudes Towards End-of-Life Decisions in Germany and Israel.Julia Inthorn, Silke Schicktanz, Nitzan Rimon-Zarfaty & Aviad Raz - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (3):329-340.
Empirical Research in Medical Ethics: How Conceptual Accounts on Normative-Empirical Collaboration May Improve Research Practice.Sabine Salloch, Jan Schildmann & Jochen Vollmann - 2012 - BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):5.
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.
How to Shape a Better Future? Epistemic Difficulties for Ethical Assessment and Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies.Brent Mittelstadt, Bernd Carsten Stahl & N. Ben Fairweather - 2015 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (5):1027-1047.
Similar books and articles
Integrated Empirical Ethics: Loss of Normativity? [REVIEW]Lieke van Der Scheer & Guy Widdershoven - 2004 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 7 (1):71-79.
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.
Scientific Contribution. Empirical Data and Moral Theory. A Plea for Integrated Empirical Ethics.Bert Molewijk, Anne M. Stiggelbout, Wilma Otten, Heleen M. Dupuis & Job Kievit - 2004 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 7 (1):55-69.
The "I" in ISCT: Normative and Empirical Facets of Integration. [REVIEW]Katherina Glac & Tae Wan Kim - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 88 (4):693 - 705.
The Empirical-Normative Split in Business Ethics.Sandra B. Rosenthal & Rogene A. Buchholz - 2000 - Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (2):399-408.
Added to index2009-03-29
Total downloads53 ( #93,536 of 2,132,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #387,667 of 2,132,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.