Hedgecoe Adam M
Department of Sociology, School of Social Sciences, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QN, UK.
Bioethics. 2004 Apr;18(2):120-143. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2004.00385.x.
This article attempts to show a way in which social science research can contribute in a meaningful and equitable way to philosophical bioethics. It builds on the social science critique of bioethics present in the work of authors such as Renee Fox, Barry Hoffmaster and Charles Bosk, proposing the characteristics of a critical bioethics that would take social science seriously. The social science critique claims that traditional philosophical bioethics gives a dominant role to idealised, rational thought, and tends to exclude social and cultural factors, relegating them to the status of irrelevancies. Another problem is they way in which bioethics assumes social reality divides down the same lines/categories as philosophical theories. Critical bioethics requires bioethicists to root their enquiries in empirical research, to challenge theories using evidence, to be reflexive and to be sceptical about the claims of other bioethicists, scientists and clinicians. The aim is to produce a rigorous normative analysis of lived moral experience.
本文试图展示一种社会科学研究能够以有意义且公平的方式为生命伦理学做出贡献的途径。它建立在诸如蕾妮·福克斯、巴里·霍夫马斯特和查尔斯·博斯克等作者作品中对生命伦理学的社会科学批判之上,提出了一种认真对待社会科学的批判性生命伦理学的特征。社会科学批判声称,传统的哲学性生命伦理学赋予理想化的理性思维以主导地位,并倾向于排除社会和文化因素,将它们置于无关紧要的地位。另一个问题是,生命伦理学假定社会现实按照与哲学理论相同的界限/类别进行划分的方式。批判性生命伦理学要求生命伦理学家将其探究扎根于实证研究,用证据挑战理论,进行反思,并对其他生命伦理学家、科学家和临床医生的主张持怀疑态度。其目的是对实际的道德体验进行严谨的规范性分析。