Alexandra Andrew, Miller Seumas
University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3010, Australia.
Theor Med Bioeth. 2009;30(1):69-80. doi: 10.1007/s11017-009-9097-1.
We have two aims in this paper. The first is negative: to demonstrate the problems in Bernard Gert's account of common morality, in particular as it applies to professional morality. The second is positive: to suggest a more satisfactory explanation of the moral basis of professional role morality, albeit one that is broadly consistent with Gert's notion of common morality, but corrects and supplements Gert's theory. The paper is in three sections. In the first, we sketch the main features of Gert's account of common morality in general. In the second, we outline Gert's explanation of the source of professional moral rules and demonstrate its inadequacy. In the third section, we provide an account of our own collectivist needs-based view of the source of the role-moral obligations of many professional roles, including those of health care professionals.
在本文中,我们有两个目标。第一个目标是否定性的:论证伯纳德·格特关于普通道德的论述中存在的问题,尤其是其在职业道德方面的应用。第二个目标是肯定性的:提出一个对职业角色道德的道德基础更令人满意的解释,尽管这个解释在很大程度上与格特的普通道德观念一致,但对格特的理论进行了修正和补充。本文分为三个部分。第一部分,我们概述格特关于普通道德论述的主要特征。第二部分,我们概述格特对职业道德规则来源的解释,并证明其不足之处。在第三部分,我们阐述我们自己基于集体主义需求的观点,即许多职业角色,包括医疗保健专业人员的角色道德义务的来源。