Hofmann Bjørn
Centre of Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Institute for the Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Gjøvik, Norway.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2024 Mar 22:1-10. doi: 10.1017/S0963180124000136.
This article raises the question of whether bioethics qualifies as a discipline. According to a standard definition of discipline as "a field of study following specific and well-established methodological rules" bioethics is not a specific discipline as there are no explicit "well-established methodological rules." The article investigates whether the methodological rules can be implicit, and whether bioethics can follow specific methodological rules within subdisciplines or for specific tasks. As this does not appear to be the case, the article examines whether bioethics' adherence to specific quality criteria (instead of methodological rules) or pursuing of a common goal can make it qualify as a discipline. Unfortunately, the result is negative. Then, the article scrutinizes whether referring to bioethics institutions and professional qualifications can ascertain bioethics as a discipline. However, this makes the definition of bioethics circular. The article ends by admitting that bioethics can qualify as a discipline according to broader definitions of discipline, for example, as an "area of knowledge, research and education." However, this would reduce bioethics' potential for demarcation and identity-building. Thus, to consolidate the discipline of bioethics and increase its impact, we should explicate and elaborate on its methodology.
本文提出了生物伦理学是否算得上一门学科的问题。根据学科的标准定义,即“遵循特定且既定方法规则的研究领域”,生物伦理学并非一门特定学科,因为不存在明确的“既定方法规则”。本文探讨了这些方法规则是否可能是隐含的,以及生物伦理学是否能在子学科内或针对特定任务遵循特定的方法规则。由于情况似乎并非如此,本文研究了生物伦理学对特定质量标准的遵循(而非方法规则)或对共同目标的追求是否能使其算得上一门学科。遗憾的是,结果是否定的。然后,本文审视了提及生物伦理学机构和专业资质能否确定生物伦理学为一门学科。然而,这使得生物伦理学的定义陷入循环。本文最后承认,根据更宽泛的学科定义,例如作为“知识、研究和教育领域”,生物伦理学可以算得上一门学科。然而,这会降低生物伦理学的区分度和身份构建潜力。因此,为了巩固生物伦理学这门学科并增强其影响力,我们应该阐明并详细阐述其方法论。