Kuczewski M
Center for the Study of Bioethics, Medical College of Wisconsin 53211, USA.
Theor Med Bioeth. 1998 Dec;19(6):509-24. doi: 10.1023/a:1009904125910.
Casuistry and principlism are two of the leading contenders to be considered the methodology of bioethics. These methods may be incommensurable since the former emphasizes the examination of cases while the latter focuses on moral principles. Conversely, since both analyze cases in terms of mid-level principles, there is hope that these methods may be reconcilable or complementary. I analyze the role of principles in each and thereby show that these theories are virtually identical when interpreted in a certain light. That is, if the gaps in each method are filled by a concept of judgment or Aristotelian practical wisdom, these methods converge.
决疑法和原则主义是被认为可作为生物伦理学方法的两种主要的竞争理论。这两种方法可能无法相互比较,因为前者强调对具体案例的审视,而后者侧重于道德原则。相反,由于两者都依据中级原则来分析案例,所以有望使这些方法相互调和或相互补充。我分析了原则在每种方法中的作用,从而表明,当从某种角度进行解读时,这些理论实际上是相同的。也就是说,如果用判断概念或亚里士多德式的实践智慧来填补每种方法中的空白,那么这些方法就会趋同。