Jennings B
Hastings Center, Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510.
J Med Philos. 1991 Aug;16(4):447-63. doi: 10.1093/jmp/16.4.447.
The concept of consensus is often appealed to in discussions of biomedical ethics and applied ethics, and it plays an important role in many influential ethical theories. Consensus is an especially influential notion among theorists who reject ethical realism and who frame ethics as a practice of discourse rather than a body of objective knowledge. It is also a practically important notion when moral decision making is subject to bureaucratic organization and oversight, as is increasingly becoming the case in medicine. Two models of consensus are examined and criticized: pluralistic consensus and overlapping consensus. As an alternative to these models, the paper argues that consensus refers to the dialogic aspects of a broader normative conception of democratic moral agency. When the preconditions for that dialogic democratic practice are met, consensus has a justificatory role in ethics; when they are not, consensus, as distinct from mere agreement, does not emerge and can have no moral authority.
在生物医学伦理学和应用伦理学的讨论中,共识的概念经常被提及,并且在许多有影响力的伦理理论中发挥着重要作用。在那些拒绝伦理实在论并将伦理学构建为一种话语实践而非客观知识体系的理论家当中,共识是一个特别有影响力的概念。当道德决策受到官僚组织和监督时,共识也是一个具有实际重要性的概念,医学领域正日益如此。本文考察并批评了两种共识模型:多元共识和重叠共识。作为这些模型的替代方案,本文认为共识指的是民主道德行为主体这一更广泛规范概念的对话层面。当这种对话式民主实践的先决条件得到满足时,共识在伦理学中具有正当性作用;当这些条件未得到满足时,与单纯的一致意见不同的共识不会出现,也不会具有道德权威。