Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal (IRCM), Université de Montréal, McGill University, 110 avenue des Pins Ouest, Montréal, QC, H2W 1R7, Canada.
Pragmatic Health Ethics Research Unit, IRCM, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Med Health Care Philos. 2024 Jun;27(2):137-154. doi: 10.1007/s11019-024-10197-9. Epub 2024 Mar 13.
Moral or ethical questions are vital because they affect our daily lives: what is the best choice we can make, the best action to take in a given situation, and ultimately, the best way to live our lives? Health ethics has contributed to moving ethics toward a more experience-based and user-oriented theoretical and methodological stance but remains in our practice an incomplete lever for human development and flourishing. This context led us to envision and develop the stance of a "living ethics", described in this inaugural collective and programmatic paper as an effort to consolidate creative collaboration between a wide array of stakeholders. We engaged in a participatory discussion and collective writing process known as instrumentalist concept analysis. This process included initial local consultations, an exploratory literature review, the constitution of a working group of 21 co-authors, and 8 workshops supporting a collaborative thinking and writing process. First, a living ethics designates a stance attentive to human experience and the role played by morality in human existence. Second, a living ethics represents an ongoing effort to interrogate and scrutinize our moral experiences to facilitate adaptation of people and contexts. It promotes the active and inclusive engagement of both individuals and communities in envisioning and enacting scenarios which correspond to their flourishing as authentic ethical agents. Living ethics encourages meaningful participation of stakeholders because moral questions touch deeply upon who we are and who we want to be. We explain various aspects of a living ethics stance, including its theoretical, methodological, and practical implications as well as some barriers to its enactment based on the reflections resulting from the collaborative thinking and writing process.
道德或伦理问题至关重要,因为它们影响我们的日常生活:我们可以做出的最佳选择、在给定情况下采取的最佳行动,以及最终,我们生活的最佳方式是什么?健康伦理促进了伦理向更基于经验和以用户为导向的理论和方法立场转变,但在我们的实践中,它仍然是促进人类发展和繁荣的一个不完整的杠杆。在这种背景下,我们设想并发展了“生命伦理”的立场,本文开篇的集体和纲领性论文将其描述为努力巩固广泛利益相关者之间的创造性合作。我们参与了一种称为工具主义概念分析的参与式讨论和集体写作过程。这个过程包括最初的地方咨询、探索性文献综述、由 21 位合著者组成的工作组的组建,以及 8 次支持协作思考和写作过程的研讨会。首先,生命伦理指定了一种关注人类经验以及道德在人类存在中所扮演角色的立场。其次,生命伦理代表了一种持续的努力,即审视和审查我们的道德经验,以促进人和环境的适应。它促进了个人和社区的积极和包容性参与,设想和实施符合其作为真实伦理主体的繁荣的情景。生命伦理鼓励利益相关者的有意义参与,因为道德问题深深地触及到我们是谁以及我们想成为谁。我们解释了生命伦理立场的各个方面,包括其理论、方法和实践意义,以及根据协作思考和写作过程的反思得出的其实施的一些障碍。