The method of 'principlism': A critique of the critique
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):487-510 (1992)
Abstract
Several scholars have recently criticized the dominant emphasis upon mid-level principles in bioethics best exemplified by Beauchamp and Childress's Principles of Biomedical Ethics . In Part I of this essay, I assess the fairness and cogency of three broad criticisms raised against ‘principlism’ as an approach: (1) that principlism, as an exercise in applied ethics, is insufficiently attentive to the dialectical relations between ethical theory and moral practice; (2) that principlism fails to offer a systematic account of the principles of nonmaleficence, beneficence, respect for autonomy, and justice; and (3) that principlism, as a version of moral pluralism, is fatally flawed by its theoretical agnosticism. While acknowledging that Beauchamp and Childress's reliance upon Ross's version of intuitionism is problematic, I conclude that the critics of principlism have failed to make a compelling case against its theoretical or practical adequacy as an ethical approach. In Part II, I assess the moral theory developed by Bernard Gert in Morality: A New Justification of the Moral Rules , because Gert has recommended his approach as a systematic alternative to principlism. I judge Gert's theory to be seriously incomplete and, in contrast to principlism, unable to generate coherent conclusions about cases of active euthanasia and paternalism. Keywords: active euthanasia, applied ethics, Beauchamp and Childress, intuitionism, paternalism, principlism, W.D. Ross CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?DOI
10.1093/jmp/17.5.487
My notes
Similar books and articles
Casuistry and principlism: The convergence of method in biomedical ethics. [REVIEW]Mark Kuczewski - 1998 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 19 (6):509-524.
The Principlism Debate: A Critical Overview.Richard B. Davis - 1995 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 20 (1):85-105.
The Limits of Principlism and Recourse to Theory: The Example of Telecare.Tom Sorell - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (4):369-382.
Perseverations on a critical theme.B. Andrew Lustig - 1993 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (5):491-502.
Specified principlism: What is it, and does it really resolve cases better than casuistry?Carson Strong - 2000 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):323 – 341.
Defending principlism well understood.Michael Quante & Andreas Vieth - 2002 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (6):621 – 649.
Moving forward in bioethical theory: Theories, cases, and specified principlism.David Degrazia - 1992 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 17 (5):511-539.
Common morality versus specified principlism: Reply to Richardson.Bernard Gert, Charles M. Culver & K. Danner Clouser - 2000 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 25 (3):308 – 322.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-08-22
Downloads
78 (#157,240)
6 months
2 (#297,737)
2010-08-22
Downloads
78 (#157,240)
6 months
2 (#297,737)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
What kind of doing is clinical ethics?George J. Agich - 2004 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 26 (1):7-24.
Appreciating W. D. Ross:On Duties and Consequences.Christopher Meyers - 2003 - Journal of Mass Media Ethics 18 (2):81-97.
A procedural approach to distributing responsibilities in R&D networks.Neelke Doorn - 2010 - Poiesis and Praxis 7 (3):169-188.
Empirical investigation of the ethical reasoning of physicians and molecular biologists – the importance of the four principles of biomedical ethics.Mette Ebbesen & Birthe D. Pedersen - 2007 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2:23-.