Schermer Maartje, Keulartz Jozef
Theor Med Bioeth. 2003;24(1):19-29. doi: 10.1023/a:1022945606323.
This paper is a reaction to an article by John Arras published earlier in this journal. In this article Arras argues that "freestanding pragmatism" has little new to offer to bioethics. We respond to some of Arras' arguments and conclude that, although he overstates his case at certain points, his critique is, broadly speaking, correct. We then introduce and discuss an alternative approach to pragmatist ethics, one which puts to work the ideas and insights of pragmatism conceived as a broad philosophical movement, without lapsing into a canon dependent approach. The approach we propose exhibits a number of characteristics that differ from Arras's account of freestanding pragmatism and offers something new to bioethics.
本文是对约翰·阿拉斯（John Arras）此前发表在本期刊上一篇文章的回应。在那篇文章中，阿拉斯认为“独立的实用主义”对生物伦理学几乎没有新的贡献。我们回应了阿拉斯的一些观点，并得出结论：尽管他在某些方面夸大了自己的观点，但总体而言，他的批评是正确的。然后，我们介绍并讨论了一种实用主义伦理学的替代方法，这种方法运用了作为一种广泛哲学运动的实用主义的思想和见解，而不会陷入依赖经典的方法。我们提出的方法展现出一些与阿拉斯对独立实用主义的描述不同的特征，并为生物伦理学提供了新的内容。
