Mbugua Karori
University of Nairobi, P. O. Box 30197-00100 Nairobi, Kenya., Email:
J Med Ethics Hist Med. 2012 Feb 7;5:1. Print 2012.
In the last two decades, there have been numerous calls for a culturally sensitive bioethics. At the same time, bioethicists have become increasingly involved in empirical research, which is a sign of dissatisfaction with the analytic methods of traditional bioethics. In this article, I will argue that although these developments have broadened and enriched the field of bioethics, they can easily be construed to be an endorsement of ethical relativism, especially by those not well grounded in academic moral philosophy. I maintain that bioethicists must resist the temptation of moving too quickly from cultural relativism to ethical relativism and from empirical findings to normative conclusions. Indeed, anyone who reasons in this way is guilty of the naturalistic fallacy. I conclude by saying that properly conceptualized, empirical research and sensitivity to cultural diversity should give rise to objective rational discourse and criticism and not indiscriminate tolerance of every possible moral practice. Bioethics must remain a normative discipline that is characterized by rigorous argumentation.
在过去二十年里,人们多次呼吁建立一种具有文化敏感性的生物伦理学。与此同时,生物伦理学家越来越多地参与实证研究,这表明他们对传统生物伦理学的分析方法感到不满。在本文中,我将论证,尽管这些发展拓宽并丰富了生物伦理学领域,但它们很容易被理解为对伦理相对主义的认可,尤其是那些在学术道德哲学方面根基不深的人。我坚持认为,生物伦理学家必须抵制过快从文化相对主义转向伦理相对主义、从实证研究结果转向规范性结论的诱惑。事实上,任何以这种方式推理的人都犯了自然主义谬误。我最后指出,经过恰当概念化的实证研究和对文化多样性的敏感性应该引发客观理性的讨论和批评,而不是不加区分地容忍每一种可能的道德实践。生物伦理学必须仍然是一门以严谨论证为特征的规范性学科。