University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA.
Am J Bioeth. 2009;9(6-7):59-65. doi: 10.1080/15265160902874320.
There has long been tension between bioethicists whose work focuses on classical philosophical inquiry and those who perform empirical studies on bioethical issues. While many have argued that empirical research merely illuminates current practices and cannot inform normative ethics, others assert that research-based work has significant implications for refining our ethical norms. In this essay, I present a novel construct for classifying empirical research in bioethics into four hierarchical categories: Lay of the Land, Ideal Versus Reality, Improving Care, and Changing Ethical Norms. Through explaining these four categories and providing examples of publications in each stratum, I define how empirical research informs normative ethics. I conclude by demonstrating how philosophical inquiry and empirical research can work cooperatively to further normative ethics.
长期以来,专注于经典哲学探究的生命伦理学家与对生命伦理问题进行实证研究的学者之间一直存在紧张关系。虽然许多人认为实证研究仅仅阐明了当前的实践,并不能为规范伦理学提供信息,但也有人断言,基于研究的工作对完善我们的伦理规范具有重要意义。在本文中,我提出了一个将生命伦理学中的实证研究分为四个层次类别:实地情况、理想与现实、改善护理和改变伦理规范的新结构。通过解释这四个类别并提供每个层次的出版物示例,我定义了实证研究如何为规范伦理学提供信息。最后,我展示了哲学探究和实证研究如何合作进一步推进规范伦理学。