Campbell Courtney S
J Med Humanit. 1992 Spring;13(1):21-9.
... As should be evident from the foregoing analysis, I have significant reservations about the moral utility of the Nazi analogy in debates over bioethics issues. Nevertheless, I am unable to dismiss its force entirely. I want to suggest that the real threat to the moral and human values expressed by the analogy will come not from responsibly formulated and clearly articulated proposals that undergo debate and scrutiny in the public forum, and whose practical impact in a democratic society is limited by institutional review and procedural safeguards. My concern instead is with the psychology of moral distancing, in which moral conscience is compartmentalized from vocational interests, such as the pursuit of scientific knowledge through biomedical research. It is the kind of psychology that Robert Jay Lifton has referrred to as "doubling: the division of the self into two functioning wholes, so that a part-self acts as an entire self," and which Lifton believes enabled the transformation of physicians from healers to killers in Nazi Germany....
从上述分析中应该可以明显看出,我对在生物伦理问题辩论中使用纳粹类比的道德效用持重大保留意见。然而,我又不能完全忽视其影响力。我想指出的是,对该类比所表达的道德和人类价值观的真正威胁并非来自于那些在公共论坛上经过辩论和审视、负责任地制定且明确阐述的提议,这些提议在民主社会中的实际影响受到制度审查和程序保障的限制。相反,我所关注的是道德疏离心理,在这种心理中,道德良知与职业利益被分隔开来,比如通过生物医学研究追求科学知识的职业利益。这就是罗伯特·杰伊·利夫顿所提到的那种“双重人格”心理:自我分裂为两个起作用的整体,以至于部分自我表现得如同整个自我,而利夫顿认为正是这种心理使得纳粹德国的医生从治疗者转变为杀戮者。