Vergara Oscar
Faculty of Law, University of Corunna, Campus of Elviña, 15071, La Coruña, Spain.
Theor Med Bioeth. 2018 Oct;39(5):361-374. doi: 10.1007/s11017-018-9466-8.
Even though it is not a methodology on the level of principlism or casuistry, narrative bioethics nonetheless contributes to and guides decision-making in the field of biomedical ethics. However, unlike other methodologies, the narrative approach lacks a set of specific patterns and formal rules for doing so. This deficiency leaves this approach more vulnerable to the influence of historical factors; in fact, the vital history of a person is made up of thousands of scenes, which one must select and group under different norms. Yet the historicity of narrative does not destroy its normative value; rather, it gives rise to a confluence of stories that contradict one another on the basis of their practical consequences. This problem is less severe in traditional cultures, where some stories take precedence over others according to the normative value conferred through the supposed authority of their sources. But it manifests in an intense manner within current multicultural societies. It is imperative to find the thread that leads outside the labyrinth of subjectivity. This paper shows that the end of this thread lies, paradoxically, not in actions but in the subject-actors that perform them-specifically when such subjects are conceived as dramaturgical characters in narrative.
尽管叙事生物伦理学并非处于原则主义或决疑论层面的一种方法,但它仍为生物医学伦理学领域的决策做出贡献并提供指导。然而,与其他方法不同的是,叙事方法缺乏一套用于此目的的特定模式和形式规则。这一缺陷使该方法更容易受到历史因素的影响;事实上,一个人的生命历程由成千上万的场景组成,人们必须根据不同的规范对其进行选择和归类。然而,叙事的历史性并未破坏其规范价值;相反,它引发了一系列基于实际后果相互矛盾的故事的融合。在传统文化中,这个问题不太严重,在传统文化里,一些故事根据其来源假定的权威性所赋予的规范价值优先于其他故事。但在当前的多元文化社会中,这个问题表现得很突出。必须找到引领走出主观性迷宫的线索。本文表明,矛盾的是,这条线索的终点不在于行动,而在于执行行动的主体——具体而言,当这些主体被视为叙事中的戏剧角色时。