Aulisio M P
University of Pittsburgh, Center for Medical Ethics, PA 15213, USA.
J Med Philos. 1998 Jun;23(4):428-38. doi: 10.1076/jmep.23.4.428.2574.
In this essay, I proceed by, first, laying out H. Tristram Engelhardt's argument for the principle of permission as the proper foundation for a secular bioethic. After considering how a number of commentators have tried to undermine this argument, I show why it is immune to some of these advances. I then offer my own critique of Engelhardt's project. This critique is two pronged. First, I argue that Engelhardt is unable to establish his own foundation for a secular bioethic. This inability leaves him with only contingent points of departure for a secular bioethic, some of the more salient of which he has ignored. Second, I argue that even if Engelhardt's project succeeds, it is in danger of being irrelevant in a practical sense because it ignores important contextual dimensions of the peculiar enterprise we call bioethics. Ultimately, the proper foundations for a relevant secular bioethic. I argue, must appeal to certain contingent features of the context that gives rise to the need for it.
在本文中,我首先阐述H. 特里斯特拉姆·恩格尔哈特支持许可原则作为世俗生物伦理学恰当基础的论点。在考虑了一些评论家试图削弱这一论点的方式后,我说明了为何它能抵御其中一些反驳。然后我对恩格尔哈特的方案提出了自己的批评。这种批评有两个方面。首先,我认为恩格尔哈特无法为世俗生物伦理学确立自己的基础。这种无能为力使他只能为世俗生物伦理学提供一些偶然的出发点,而其中一些较为突出的出发点他却忽略了。其次,我认为即使恩格尔哈特的方案成功了,从实际意义上讲它也有变得无关紧要的风险,因为它忽略了我们称之为生物伦理学的这一特殊事业的重要背景维度。我认为,相关世俗生物伦理学的恰当基础必须诉诸引发对其需求的背景的某些偶然特征。