Suppr超能文献

Clarifying the discussion on brain death.

作者信息

Dagi F T, Kaufman R

机构信息

Medical College of Georgia and the Georgia Institute of Technology, Augusta, Georgia, USA.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 2001 Oct;26(5):503-25. doi: 10.1076/jmep.26.5.503.3003.

Abstract

Definitions of death are based on subjective standards, priorities, and social conventions rather than on objective facts about the state of human physiology. It is the meaning assigned to the facts that determines when someone may be deemed to have died, not the facts themselves. Even though subjective standards for the diagnosis of death show remarkable consistency across communities, they are extrinsic. They are driven, implicitly or explicitly, by ideas about what benefits the community rather than what benefits the individual. The differences that do exist across communities generally reduce to questions about legitimacy and not fact. The questions at the core of the debate about brain death are better framed by asking: "Whom ought we deem to be dead?" rather than: "Who is dead." The rationale for equating brain death with death, therefore, extends well beyond somatic and biological concepts of death.

摘要

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验