Does ethical theory have a future in bioethics?
Although there has long been a successful and stable marriage between philosophical ethical theory and bioethics, the marriage has become shaky as bioethics has become a more interdisciplinary and practical field. A practical price is paid for theoretical generality in philosophy. It is often unclear whether and, if so, how theory is to be brought to bear on dilemmatic problems, public policy, moral controversies, and moral conflict. Three clearly philosophical problems are used to see how philosophers are doing in handling practical problems: Cultural Relativity, and Moral Universality, Moral Justification, and Conceptual Analysis. In each case it is argued that philosophers need to develop theories and methods more closely attuned to practice. The work of philosophers such as Ruth Macklin, Norman Daniels, and Gerald Dworkin is examined. In the writings of each there is major methological gap between philosophical theory (or method) and practical conclusions. The future of philosophical ethics in interdisciplinary bioethics may turn on whether such gaps can be closed. If not, bioethics may justifiably conclude that philosophy is of little value.
Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Philosophy Department, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA.
Tom L
TL
Beauchamp
D001675:Bioethics; D026689:Ethical Analysis; D028781:Ethical Relativism; D028663:Ethical Theory; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006801:Humans; D007258:Informed Consent; D009014:Morals; D010686:Philosophy, Medical