Suppr超能文献

伦理委员会、原则与后果。

Ethics committees, principles and consequences.

作者信息

Häyry M

机构信息

University of Helsinki, Finland.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 1998 Apr;24(2):81-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.2.81.

Abstract

When ethics committees evaluate the research proposals submitted to them by biomedical scientists, they can seek guidance from laws and regulations, their own beliefs, values and experiences, and from the theories of philosophers. The starting point of this paper is that philosophers can only be helpful to the members of ethics committees if they take into account in their models both the basic moral intuitions that most of us share and the consequences of people's choices. A moral view which can be labelled as a consequentialist interpretation of mid-level principlism is developed, defended and applied to some real-life and hypothetical research proposals.

摘要

当伦理委员会评估生物医学科学家提交给他们的研究提案时,他们可以从法律法规、自身的信念、价值观和经验以及哲学家的理论中寻求指导。本文的出发点是,哲学家只有在其模型中同时考虑到我们大多数人共有的基本道德直觉以及人们选择的后果,才能够对伦理委员会的成员有所帮助。一种可被称为中级原则主义的结果主义解释的道德观点得以发展、辩护并应用于一些现实生活中的和假设的研究提案。

相似文献

1
Ethics committees, principles and consequences.伦理委员会、原则与后果。
J Med Ethics. 1998 Apr;24(2):81-5. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.2.81.
3
Research ethics.研究伦理。
West Indian Med J. 1995 Dec;44(4):115-8.
4
Principlism and the ethical appraisal of clinical trials.原则主义与临床试验的伦理评估
Bioethics. 1995 Oct;9(5):399-418. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00314.x.

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