Momeyer R W
Department of Philosophy, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056.
J Med Philos. 1990 Aug;15(4):391-409. doi: 10.1093/jmp/15.4.391.
Three standard tasks undertaken by applied ethicists engaged in the public policy process are identifying value issues, clarifying concepts and meanings, and analyzing arguments. I urge that these should be expanded to include making specific moral judgments and advocating positions and policies. Three objections to philosophers/ethicists' engagement in the formation of public policy are advanced and evaluated: philosophers necessarily do public policy badly, doing it at all compromises one's integrity as a seeker after truth, and frequently participation is in the service of a repressive status quo that is structured simultaneously to preclude radical change and to co-opt ethicists. Finally, however, I argue that those who would be 'applied ethicists' cannot avoid all participation in some form of a public policy process; that engagement holds the hope as well for improved ethical theory; that the preferred form of participation is frequently from outside of establishment bodies; and that wherever philosophers do involve themselves in policy formulation, this is best done in the expanded sense urged at the outset.
识别价值问题、阐明概念和含义以及分析论点。我主张应将这些任务扩展到包括做出具体的道德判断以及倡导立场和政策。文中提出并评估了对哲学家/伦理学家参与公共政策形成的三点反对意见:哲学家必然不擅长制定公共政策,参与其中会损害其作为真理追求者的正直性,而且参与往往是为维护压制性的现状服务,这种现状旨在同时阻止激进变革并拉拢伦理学家。然而,最后我认为,那些想成为“应用伦理学家”的人无法避免以某种形式参与公共政策制定过程;这种参与也为改进伦理理论带来了希望;首选的参与形式通常来自体制外机构;而且无论哲学家在何处参与政策制定,最好都按照一开始所主张的广义形式来进行。