Suppr超能文献

原则主义遗漏了什么。

What principlism misses.

作者信息

Walker Tom

机构信息

Centre for Professional Ethics, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2009 Apr;35(4):229-31; discussion 232-3. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.027227.

Abstract

Principlism aims to provide a framework to help those working in medicine both to identify moral problems and to make decisions about what to do. For it to meet this aim, the principles included within it must express values that all morally serious people share (or ought to share), and there must be no other values that all morally serious people share (or ought to share). This paper challenges the latter of these claims. I will argue that as a descriptive claim about what values morally serious people do in fact share, principlism is inadequate; more principles would be needed to make this claim true. Furthermore, I will argue that while, taken as a claim about what principles we ought to share, principlism could turn out to be correct, it is either unsupported or unable to meet its aims. The only way in which principlists can avoid these problems is to add to the current four principles.

摘要

原则主义旨在提供一个框架,以帮助从事医学工作的人员识别道德问题并就该做什么做出决策。为了实现这一目标,其中包含的原则必须表达所有道德严肃的人都认同(或应该认同)的价值观,并且不存在其他所有道德严肃的人都认同(或应该认同)的价值观。本文对后一种说法提出质疑。我将论证,作为一种关于道德严肃的人实际上所共有的价值观的描述性主张,原则主义是不充分的;需要更多的原则才能使这一主张成立。此外,我将论证,虽然作为一种关于我们应该认同哪些原则的主张,原则主义可能是正确的,但它要么缺乏依据,要么无法实现其目标。原则主义者避免这些问题的唯一方法是在现有的四条原则基础上进行补充。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验