Suppr超能文献

助推与强制:概念、实证及规范性考量

Nudges and coercion: conceptual, empirical, and normative considerations.

作者信息

Cratsley Kelso

机构信息

Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University, Healy Hall, Washington, D.C., 20057, USA.

出版信息

Monash Bioeth Rev. 2015 Jun-Sep;33(2-3):210-8. doi: 10.1007/s40592-015-0036-9.

Abstract

Given that the concept of coercion remains a central concern for bioethics, Quigley's (Monash Bioethics Rev 32:141-158, 2014) recent article provides a helpful analysis of its frequent misapplication in debates over the use of 'nudges'. In this commentary I present a generally sympathetic response to Quigley's argument while also raising several issues that are important for the larger debates about nudges and coercion. I focus on several closely related topics, including the definition of coercion, the role of empirical research, and the normative concerns at the core of these disputes. I suggest that while a degree of precision is certainly required when deploying the relevant concepts, perhaps informed by empirical data, we need to continue to push these debates towards more pressing normative considerations.

摘要

鉴于强制概念仍是生物伦理学的核心关注点,奎格利(《莫纳什生物伦理学评论》第32卷:141 - 158页,2014年)最近的文章对其在关于“助推”使用的辩论中频繁被误用的情况进行了有益分析。在这篇评论中,我对奎格利的观点总体上持赞同态度,同时也提出几个对于关于助推和强制的更广泛辩论很重要的问题。我关注几个密切相关的主题,包括强制的定义、实证研究的作用以及这些争议核心的规范性关切。我认为,虽然在运用相关概念时确实需要一定程度的精确性,或许可参考实证数据,但我们需要继续将这些辩论推向更紧迫的规范性考量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验