Holmes R L
Department of Philosophy, University of Rochester, NY 14627.
J Med Philos. 1990 Apr;15(2):143-59. doi: 10.1093/jmp/15.2.143.
Philosophical ethics comprises metaethics, normative ethics and applied ethics. These have characteristically received analytic treatment by twentieth-century Anglo-American philosophy. But there has been disagreement over their interrelationship to one another and the relationship of analytical ethics to substantive morality--the making of moral judgments. I contend that the expertise philosophers have in either theoretical or applied ethics does not equip them to make sounder moral judgments on the problems of bioethics than nonphilosophers. One cannot "apply" theories like Kantianism or consequentialism to get solutions to practical moral problems unless one knows which theory is correct, and that is a metaethical question over which there is no consensus. On the other hand, to presume to be able to reach solutions through neutral analysis of problems is unavoidably to beg controversial theoretical issues in the process. Thus, while analytical ethics can play an important clarificatory role in bioethics, it can neither provide, nor substitute for, moral wisdom.
哲学伦理学包括元伦理学、规范伦理学和应用伦理学。这些在20世纪的英美哲学中通常受到分析性的探讨。但是，对于它们彼此之间的相互关系以及分析伦理学与实质性道德（即做出道德判断）之间的关系，一直存在分歧。我认为，哲学家在理论伦理学或应用伦理学方面的专业知识，并不足以使他们比非哲学家更能对生物伦理学问题做出更合理的道德判断。除非知道哪种理论是正确的，否则不能“应用”康德主义或后果主义等理论来解决实际的道德问题，而这是一个元伦理学问题，对此并没有共识。另一方面，假定能够通过对问题的中立分析来得出解决方案，不可避免地会在这个过程中回避有争议的理论问题。因此，虽然分析伦理学在生物伦理学中可以发挥重要的澄清作用，但它既不能提供道德智慧，也不能替代道德智慧。
