Suppr超能文献

[生物伦理学领域涉及的审议形式:技术审议与伦理审议]

[THE FORMS OF DELIBERATION INVOLVED IN THE FIELD OF BIOETHICS: TECHNIQUE DELIBERATION AND ETHICS DELIBERATION].

作者信息

Neves Pinto Gerson

出版信息

J Int Bioethique Ethique Sci. 2015 Dec;26(4):119-36, 159.

Abstract

In this article the author examines the formulation of the problem of new technologies with their ethical limits and legal. To do this, in a first it is d'assess the contribuitions of the two most important contemporary philosophers who have treated this subject: Jürgen Habermas and Ronald Dworkin, while trying to put them into dialog with the one who has been one of the founders of l'classic ethics: Aristotle. Then, it tries to answer the question of how could we understand this notion that Dworkin nome "moral dislocation" between the random and the choice or well, as the appointed Habermas, "l'extension of the contingency". Finally, we questioned how the Aristotelian distinction between the technical deliberation and deliberative ethical-moral can contribute to a better understanding of the questions on the decisions and choices that will make the moral agents (such as patients or the judges), as well as those relating to the type of deliberation technique chosen by the doctor or by the health professional.

摘要

在本文中,作者探讨了新技术问题的构成及其伦理界限和法律问题。为此,首先要评估两位当代最重要的探讨过这一主题的哲学家的贡献:尤尔根·哈贝马斯和罗纳德·德沃金,同时试图让他们与经典伦理学的奠基人之一亚里士多德进行对话。然后,试图回答这样一个问题:我们如何理解德沃金所称的随机与选择之间的“道德错位”这一概念,或者如哈贝马斯所说的“偶然性的扩展”。最后,我们质疑亚里士多德对技术审议与伦理道德审议的区分如何有助于更好地理解道德主体(如患者或法官)所做的决策和选择相关的问题,以及与医生或健康专业人员所选择的审议技术类型相关的问题。

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