Jecker N S, Atuire C A, Ravitsky V, Ghaly M, Vaswani V, Voo T C
African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Centre for Bioethics, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
J Bioeth Inq. 2025 Jun;22(2):381-394. doi: 10.1007/s11673-024-10410-7. Epub 2024 Dec 16.
This paper sets forth and defends a pluriversal approach to religion in the context of an increasingly global bioethics. Section I introduces a pluriversal view as a normative technique for engaging across difference. A normative pluriversal approach sets five constraints: civility, change from within, justice, non-domination, and tolerance. Section II applies a pluriversal approach to religion. It argues that this approach is epistemically just, recognizes diverse standpoints, and represents a productive, preferred, way to tackle global bioethics concerns. Section II also considers an opposing viewpoint, which holds that religious perspectives have no place in bioethics. We show that this viewpoint would have adverse effects on bioethics publishing, conferencing, and training programmes. The paper concludes (in Section III) that bioethicists should engage with people who hold different worldviews, including religious worldviews, and should do so in accordance with pluriversal ethical constraints.
本文在日益全球化的生物伦理学背景下提出并捍卫一种关于宗教的多元普遍主义方法。第一部分介绍多元普遍主义观点，将其作为一种跨越差异进行交流的规范性技术。规范性多元普遍主义方法设定了五个限制条件：文明、内部变革、正义、非支配和宽容。第二部分将多元普遍主义方法应用于宗教。它认为这种方法在认知上是公正的，承认不同的观点，并且是处理全球生物伦理学问题的一种有效、可取的方式。第二部分还考虑了一种相反的观点，即认为宗教观点在生物伦理学中没有立足之地。我们表明，这种观点会对生物伦理学的出版、会议和培训项目产生不利影响。本文（在第三部分）得出结论，生物伦理学家应该与持有不同世界观的人进行交流，包括宗教世界观，并且应该按照多元普遍的伦理限制来这样做。
