Suppr超能文献

原则主义及其所谓的竞争对手。

Principlism and its alleged competitors.

作者信息

Beauchamp Tom L

出版信息

Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1995 Sep;5(3):181-98. doi: 10.1353/ken.0.0111.

Abstract

Principles that provide general normative frameworks in bioethics have been criticized since the late 1980s, when several different methods and types of moral philosophy began to be proposed as alternatives or substitutes. Several accounts have emerged in recent years, including: (1) Impartial Rule Theory (supported in this issue by K. Danner Clouser), (2) Casuistry (supported in this issue by Albert Jonsen), and (3) Virtue Ethics (supported in this issue by Edmund D. Pellegrino). Although often presented as rival methods or theories, these approaches are consistent with and should not be considered adversaries of a principle-based account.

摘要

自20世纪80年代末以来,生物伦理学中提供一般规范性框架的原则受到了批评,当时开始提出几种不同的方法和道德哲学类型作为替代方案。近年来出现了几种观点,包括:(1)公正规则理论(本期由K. 丹纳·克劳泽支持),(2)决疑论(本期由阿尔伯特·琼森支持),以及(3)美德伦理学(本期由埃德蒙·D. 佩莱格里诺支持)。尽管这些方法常常被视为相互竞争的方法或理论,但它们与基于原则的观点是一致的,不应被视为其对手。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验