Suppr超能文献

丹尼尔斯健康正义理论面临的实际问题和所谓问题。

Real and alleged problems for Daniels's account of health justice.

作者信息

Kelleher J Paul

机构信息

University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1300 University Ave., Room 1430, Madison, WI 53706, USA.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 2013 Aug;38(4):388-99. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jht027.

Abstract

Norman Daniels's theory of health justice is the most comprehensive and systematic such theory we have. In one of the few articles published so far on Daniels's new book, Just Health, Benjamin Sachs argues that Daniels's core "principle of equality of opportunity does not do the work Daniels needs it to do." Yet Sachs's objections to Daniels's framework are deeply flawed. Where these arguments do not rely on significant misreadings of Daniels, they ignore sensible strands in Just Health that considerably dull their force. After disarming Sachs's arguments against Daniels's theory, I explain why I agree with Sachs's conclusion: Daniels's equality of opportunity-based account of health justice rests on shaky foundations.

摘要

诺曼·丹尼尔斯的健康正义理论是我们现有的最全面、系统的此类理论。在迄今为止发表的关于丹尼尔斯新书《正义的健康》的少数几篇文章中,本杰明·萨克斯认为,丹尼尔斯的核心“机会平等原则无法发挥他所期望的作用”。然而,萨克斯对丹尼尔斯框架的反对存在严重缺陷。在这些论点并非严重误读丹尼尔斯的情况下,它们忽视了《正义的健康》中一些合理的观点,而这些观点极大地削弱了其说服力。在反驳了萨克斯针对丹尼尔斯理论的论点后,我将解释为何我认同萨克斯的结论:丹尼尔斯基于机会平等的健康正义理论根基不稳。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验