Bayertz K
Universitätsschwerpunkt Wissenschaftsforschung, Universität Bielefeld BRD.
Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1990 Jan 10;120(1-2):3-9.
Against the background of rapid progress in the field of reproduction medicine and gene technology, the governments of various countries have set up commissions to discuss the moral, legal and social problems involved and make proposals for regulation. Thus, in 1986 the Swiss Federal Council convened an expert commission which, after two years of discussion, has recently published a voluminous document (the "Amstad Report"). The present paper attempts to analyze, from the philosophical viewpoint, some of the problems associated with such processes for the further development of morality for specific ends. A leading question in this regard is the role of philosophical thought in these processes, i.e. the potentialities and limits of ethics for the creation of a moral consensus on the problems surrounding technical intervention in human reproduction. There are four schools of thought: 1. The activities of expert commissions are evidence of the fact that man is at present endeavouring consciously to "construct" his morality. He may always have been the subject of his mortality, but this was without his own knowledge and awareness. Today, under the pressure of new means of action, man is becoming the conscious subject of his mortality and the formation of a morality is a process aimed at a specific result. 2. The fundamental difficulty of such a scheme arises from the absence of a theoretical and socially tested system for the "construction" of a new morality. This is also true of philosophy: on questions of morality it possesses analytic competence but no specific methods of generating new norms and values.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
在生殖医学和基因技术领域快速发展的背景下,各国政府纷纷成立委员会,讨论其中涉及的道德、法律和社会问题,并提出监管建议。因此,1986年瑞士联邦委员会召集了一个专家委员会,经过两年的讨论,该委员会最近发表了一份篇幅冗长的文件(《阿姆施塔德报告》)。本文试图从哲学角度分析与为特定目的进一步发展道德的此类过程相关的一些问题。在这方面的一个主要问题是哲学思想在这些过程中的作用,即伦理学在围绕人类生殖技术干预问题达成道德共识方面的潜力和局限性。有四种思想流派:1. 专家委员会的活动证明,人类目前正在有意识地努力“构建”自己的道德。他可能一直是自己道德的主体,但这是在他不知情和未意识到的情况下。如今,在新行动手段的压力下,人类正成为自己道德的有意识主体,道德的形成是一个旨在实现特定结果的过程。2. 这种方案的根本困难在于缺乏一个经过理论和社会检验的“构建”新道德的体系。哲学也是如此:在道德问题上,它具备分析能力,但没有产生新规范和价值观的具体方法。(摘要截取自250字)