Suppr超能文献

琼森对决疑法的真实看法:关于对怀尔德神父的滥用的一则笔记。

How Jonsen really views casuistry: a note on the abuse of Father Wildes.

作者信息

Tallmon J M

机构信息

Dept. of Communication Studies and Theatre, South Dakota State University, Brookings 57007.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 1994 Feb;19(1):103-13; discussion 115-9. doi: 10.1093/jmp/19.1.103.

Abstract

Kevin Wildes has recently argued in the Journal that Albert Jonsen's model of casuistry is ill-suited to a secular world context, because this model is rooted in a particular history and because of the moral pluralism of contemporary society in which a content-specific method of moral reasoning cannot readily be deployed. Contra Wildes, two arguments are offered. First, casuistry is not tied exclusively to Roman Catholic theology; casuistry also has deep roots in Classical thought, roots that Jonsen and Toulmin underscore. Second, the context of Roman Catholic theology can be distinguished from the method of casuistry, permitting that method to be deployed successfully in morally pluralistic contexts.

摘要

凯文·怀尔德斯最近在《期刊》上提出,阿尔伯特·琼森的决疑论模式不适用于世俗世界背景,因为该模式植根于特定的历史,也因为当代社会存在道德多元主义,在这种情况下,一种针对具体内容的道德推理方法无法轻易得到运用。与怀尔德斯的观点相反,本文提出两点论证。其一,决疑论并非仅与罗马天主教神学相关;决疑论在古典思想中也有深厚根源,琼森和图尔敏强调了这些根源。其二,罗马天主教神学的背景可与决疑论方法区分开来,这使得该方法能够在道德多元的背景中成功运用。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验