Potts M
Department of Philosophy, Methodist College, Fayetteville, NC, USA.
J Med Philos. 2001 Oct;26(5):479-91. doi: 10.1076/jmep.26.5.479.3005.
Alan Shewmon's article, 'The brain and somatic integration: Insights into the standard biological rationale for equating "brain death" with death' (2001), strikes at the heart of the standard justification for whole brain death criteria. The standard justification, which I call the 'standard paradigm', holds that the permanent loss of the functions of the entire brain marks the end of the integrative unity of the body. In my response to Shewmon's article, I first offer a brief summary of the standard paradigm and cite recent work by advocates of whole brain criteria who tenaciously cling to the standard paradigm despite increasing evidence showing that it has significant weaknesses. Second, I address Shewmon's case against the standard paradigm, arguing that he is successful in showing that whole brain dead patients have integrated organic unity. Finally, I discuss some minor problems with Shewmon's article, along with suggestions for further elaboration.
艾伦·休蒙的文章《大脑与躯体整合:对将“脑死亡”等同于死亡的标准生物学原理的见解》(2001年),直击全脑死亡标准的标准正当理由的核心。这个标准正当理由,我称之为“标准范式”,认为整个大脑功能的永久丧失标志着身体整合统一性的终结。在我对休蒙文章的回应中,我首先简要概述标准范式,并引用全脑标准倡导者的近期著作,他们尽管有越来越多的证据表明该范式存在重大缺陷,但仍顽固地坚持标准范式。其次,我论述休蒙反对标准范式的理由,认为他成功地表明了全脑死亡患者具有整合的有机统一性。最后,我讨论休蒙文章中的一些小问题,以及进一步阐述的建议。