Zawiła-Niedźwiecki Jakub, Olender Jacek
Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw, Krakowskie Przedmieście 3, Warszawa, 00-097, Poland.
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Nowy Świat 72, Warszawa, 00-330, Poland.
J Bioeth Inq. 2016 Mar;13(1):21-5. doi: 10.1007/s11673-015-9682-0. Epub 2016 Jan 5.
In a recent paper, Levy, Gadd, Kerridge, and Komesaroff attempt to defend the ethicality of homeopathy by attacking the utilitarian ethical framework as a basis for medical ethics and by introducing a distinction between evidence-based medicine and modern science. This paper demonstrates that their argumentation is not only insufficient to achieve that goal but also incorrect. Utilitarianism is not required to show that homeopathic practice is unethical; indeed, any normative basis of medical ethics will make it unethical, as a defence of homeopathic practice requires the rejection of modern natural sciences, which are an integral part of medical ethics systems. This paper also points out that evidence-based medicine lies at the very core of modern science. Particular arguments made by Levy et al. within the principlist medical ethics normative system are also shown to be wrong.
在最近的一篇论文中,利维、加德、克里奇和科梅萨罗夫试图为顺势疗法的伦理合理性进行辩护,他们抨击功利主义伦理框架作为医学伦理的基础,并引入了循证医学与现代科学之间的区别。本文表明,他们的论证不仅不足以实现该目标,而且是错误的。功利主义并非必须被用来证明顺势疗法的实践是不道德的;事实上,医学伦理的任何规范性基础都会使其不道德,因为对顺势疗法实践的辩护需要摒弃现代自然科学,而现代自然科学是医学伦理体系不可或缺的一部分。本文还指出,循证医学处于现代科学的核心位置。利维等人在原则主义医学伦理规范体系内提出的具体论点也被证明是错误的。