Fan Ruiping
Bioethics. 1997 Jul-Oct;11(3-4):309-22. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00070.
Most contemporary bioethicists believe that Western bioethical principles, such as the principle of autonomy, are universally binding wherever bioethics is found. According to these bioethicists, these principles may be subject to culturally-conditioned further interpretations for their application in different nations or regions, but an 'abstract content' of each principle remains unchanged, which provides 'an objective basis for moral judgment and international law'. This essay intends to demonstrate that this is not the case. Taking the principle of autonomy as an example, this essay argues that there is no such shared 'abstract content' between the Western bioethical principle of autonomy and the East Asian bioethical principle of autonomy. Other things being equal, the Western principle of autonomy demands self-determination, assumes a subjective conception of the good and promotes the value of individual independence, whilst the East Asian principle of autonomy requires family-determination, presupposes an objective conception of the good and upholds the value of harmonious dependence. They differ from each other in the most general sense and basic moral requirement.
大多数当代生物伦理学家认为，诸如自主原则等西方生物伦理原则，无论在何处出现生物伦理学，都具有普遍约束力。按照这些生物伦理学家的观点，这些原则在不同国家或地区应用时，可能会因文化因素而有进一步的阐释，但每条原则的“抽象内容”保持不变，这为“道德判断和国际法提供了客观依据”。本文旨在证明情况并非如此。以自主原则为例，本文认为西方生物伦理自主原则与东亚生物伦理自主原则之间不存在这样共有的“抽象内容”。在其他条件相同的情况下，西方自主原则要求自我决定，假定善的主观概念，并推崇个人独立的价值，而东亚自主原则要求家庭决定，预设善的客观概念，并秉持和谐依存的价值。它们在最一般的意义和基本道德要求上彼此不同。
