Schmidt Harald, Schwartz Jason L
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2016;26(4):431-456. doi: 10.1353/ken.2016.0037.
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations of national ethics commissions (NECs) have received considerable attention throughout the 40-year history of these groups in the United States and worldwide. However, the procedures or types of argument by which these bodies arrive at their decisions have received far less scrutiny. This paper explores how the diversity of ethical principles, concepts, or theories is featured in publications or decisions of these bodies, with particular emphasis on the need for NECs to be inclusive of pluralist positions that typically exist in contemporary democracies. The discussion is centered on the extent to which NECs may focus on providing focal frameworks, primarily framing the ethical issues at stake, or normative frameworks, additionally providing transparent justifications for any conclusions and recommendations that are made. The structure allows for assessments of the relative merits and drawbacks of different approaches in both theory and practice.
在美国及全球,国家伦理委员会(NECs)的调查结果、结论和建议在其40年的历史中受到了广泛关注。然而,这些机构做出决策所采用的程序或论证类型却很少受到审查。本文探讨了伦理原则、概念或理论的多样性在这些机构的出版物或决策中是如何体现的,特别强调了国家伦理委员会需要包容当代民主国家中通常存在的多元立场。讨论的核心是国家伦理委员会在多大程度上可能侧重于提供焦点框架,主要是界定所涉伦理问题,或者侧重于规范框架,即 additionally 为所做的任何结论和建议提供透明的理由。这种结构有助于评估不同方法在理论和实践中的相对优缺点。