Wildes Kevin Wm
J Med Philos. 1994 Feb;19(1):115-9. doi: 10.1093/jmp/19.1.115.
James Tallmon has argued that my criticisms of Jonsen and Toulmin are ill founded. Tallmon argues that Jonsen and Toulmin argue for a method of rhetorical reasoning and not for a particular content. He argues that if one distinguishes the content and method of casuistry the Jonsen-Toulmin model can work. But Tallmon, like Jonsen and Toulmin, cannot escape the need for casuistry to have a content. Tallmon's response evidences that need since he assumes that there is a 'Medical Community' which has a moral vision.
詹姆斯·塔尔蒙认为,我对琼森和图尔敏的批评毫无根据。塔尔蒙认为,琼森和图尔敏主张的是一种修辞推理方法,而非某种特定的内容。他认为,如果能区分决疑法的内容和方法,琼森—图尔敏模型就能发挥作用。但塔尔蒙和琼森、图尔敏一样,无法回避决疑法需要有内容这一问题。塔尔蒙的回应就证明了这一需求,因为他假定存在一个有道德愿景的“医学共同体”。