25 found
Order:
Disambiguations
David M. Adams [25]David Michael Adams [2]
  1.  5
    Justifying Ethical Expertise.David M. Adams - 2019 - American Journal of Bioethics 19 (11):67-68.
    Volume 19, Issue 11, November 2019, Page 67-68.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2.  70
    Knowing When Disagreements Are Deep.David M. Adams - 2005 - Informal Logic 25 (1):65-77.
    Reasoned disagreement is a pervasive feature of public life, and the persistence of disagreement is sometimes troublesome, reflecting the need to make difficult decisions. Fogelin suggests that parties to a deep disagreement should abandon reason and switch to non-rational persuasion. But how are the parties to know when to make such a switch? I argue that Fogelin's analysis doesn't clearly address this question, and that disputes arising in areas like medical decision making are such that the parties to them have (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  3.  10
    Consensus, Clinical Decision Making, and Unsettled Cases.David M. Adams & William J. Winslade - 2011 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 22 (4):310.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  4. Ethics Consultation and 'Facilitated'consensus.David M. Adams - 2009 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 20 (1):44-55.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  5.  40
    Ethics Expertise and Moral Authority: Is There a Difference?David Michael Adams - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics 13 (2):27-28.
  6.  6
    ""The Role of the Clinical Ethics Consultant in" Unsettled" Cases.David M. Adams - 2011 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 22 (4):328.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  7. Belief and Death: Capital Punishment and the Competence-for-Execution Requirement.David M. Adams - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (1):17-30.
    A curious and comparatively neglected element of death penalty jurisprudence in America is my target in this paper. That element concerns the circumstances under which severely mentally disabled persons, incarcerated on death row, may have their sentences carried out. Those circumstances are expressed in a part of the law which turns out to be indefensible. This legal doctrine—competence-for-execution —holds that a condemned, death-row inmate may not be killed if, at the time of his scheduled execution, he lacks an awareness of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  37
    Punishing Hate and Achieving Equality.David M. Adams - 2005 - Criminal Justice Ethics 24 (1):19-30.
  9.  31
    Book Review: Janet L. Dolgin. Families: Law, Gender and Difference and Defining the Family: Law, Technology, and Reproduction in an Uneasy Age. By New York: New York University Press, 1997. And David M. Estlund and Martha C. Nussbaum. Sex, Preference, and Family: Essays in Law and Nature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 2002 - Hypatia 17 (3):254-256.
  10. Medical Ethics and Competence for Execution.David M. Adams - forthcoming - Journal of Clinical Ethics.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  39
    Families: Law, Gender and Difference.David M. Adams - 2002 - Hypatia 17 (3):254-256.
  12. Philosophical Problems in the Law.David M. Adams (ed.) - 1996 - Wadsworth.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  54
    Michael Freeden, Ideologies and Political Theory:Ideologies and Political Theory.David M. Adams - 1998 - Ethics 108 (4):814-817.
  14.  26
    A Practical Guide to Clinical Ethics Consulting by Christopher Meyers. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2007. 114 Pp. $19.95.: 8080432. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 2008 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 17 (3):347-350.
  15.  23
    In Defense of the Autonomy of Rights.David M. Adams - 1988 - Philosophy Research Archives 14:51-72.
    Several philosophers, including most prominently Theodore Benditt, have recently urged that the discourse of rights, widely thought to be a central, if not foundational feature of moral and political thought, is in reality a mere “redundant” appendage---a discourse that holds no distinctive place in moral or legal reasoning owing to the fact that it is thoroughly derivative because collapsible into other forms of moral or legal language. In this paper I attempt to (1) flesh out this “Redundancy” Thesis (RT) and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  35
    Book Review: Janet L. Dolgin. Families: Law, Gender and Difference and Defining the Family: Law, Technology, and Reproduction in an Uneasy Age. By New York: New York University Press, 1997. And David M. Estlund and Martha C. Nussbaum. Sex, Preference, and Family: Essays in Law and Nature. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 2002 - Hypatia 17 (3):254-256.
  17.  42
    Fitting Punishment to Crime. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 1996 - Law and Philosophy 15 (4):407-415.
  18.  34
    David S. Oderberg and Jacqueline A. Laing, Human Lives: Critical Essays on Consequentialist Bioethics:Human Lives: Critical Essays on Consequentialist Bioethics.David M. Adams - 2000 - Ethics 110 (2):434-436.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  28
    Divided Minds and Successive Selves: Ethical Issues in Disorders of Identity and Personality, by Jennifer Radden. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. 296 Pp. $55.00. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 2003 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 12 (1):131-134.
  20.  24
    Review: Fitting Punishment to Crime. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 1996 - Law and Philosophy 15 (4):407 - 415.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  6
    In Defense of the Autonomy of Rights.David M. Adams - 1988 - Philosophy Research Archives 14:51-72.
    Several philosophers, including most prominently Theodore Benditt, have recently urged that the discourse of rights, widely thought to be a central, if not foundational feature of moral and political thought, is in reality a mere “redundant” appendage---a discourse that holds no distinctive place in moral or legal reasoning owing to the fact that it is thoroughly derivative because collapsible into other forms of moral or legal language. In this paper I attempt to flesh out this “Redundancy” Thesis and identify and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  22
    Feinberg on Claiming Claims.David M. Adams - 1987 - Journal of Value Inquiry 21 (1):79-85.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  12
    Review: Families: Law, Gender and Difference. [REVIEW]David M. Adams - 2002 - Hypatia 17 (3):254 - 256.
  24.  4
    The Problem of the Incomplete Attempt.David M. Adams - 1998 - Social Theory and Practice 24 (3):317-343.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Final Comments.David M. Adams & William J. Winslade - 2011 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 22 (4):358.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark