Nelson James Lindemann
Department of Philosophy, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA.
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2005 Sep;15(3):251-67. doi: 10.1353/ken.2005.0022.
The President's Council on Bioethics has tried to make a distinctive contribution to the methodology of such public bodies in developing what it has styled a "richer bioethics." The Council's procedure contrasts with more modest methods of public bioethical deliberation employed by the United Kingdom's Warnock Committee. The practices of both bodies are held up against the backdrop of concerns about moral and political alienation, prompted by the limitations of moral reasoning and by moral dissent from state policy under even the most democratic of governments. Although the President's Council's rhetoric is often scrupulously conciliatory, recurring features of its argumentative practice are regrettably divisive. They order these things better in Britain.
总统生物伦理委员会试图在发展其所谓的“更丰富的生物伦理”方面,为这类公共机构的方法做出独特贡献。该委员会的程序与英国沃诺克委员会采用的更为适度的公共生物伦理审议方法形成对比。在对道德和政治疏离的担忧背景下,展现了这两个机构的做法,这种担忧是由道德推理的局限性以及即使在最民主的政府下对国家政策的道德异议所引发的。尽管总统委员会的言辞往往极其温和,但遗憾的是,其论证实践中反复出现的特征具有分裂性。在英国,他们在这些事情上做得更好。