• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >Kant and the political context of contemporary bioethics.
【24h】

Kant and the political context of contemporary bioethics.

机译：康德与当代生物伦理学的政治背景。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This dissertation critically examines the incorporation of normative political philosophy in the contemporary bioethics literature addressing laws and public policies. It is argued that contemporary bioethics literature has substantially neglected to make positive use of normative political philosophy in questions regarding laws and policies, when such use is seemingly strictly necessary. The author defends this thesis by critically examining the use of Kant's moral philosophy in contemporary bioethics debates about laws and public policies. The author argues that Kant's moral philosophy is often used in contemporary bioethics debates in a manner at odds with Kant's own understanding of its relevance for laws and public policies. Kant did not believe that principles suitable for the analysis of the morality of actions could be applied unproblematically to questions of law or public policy. The failure to heed Kant's careful distinction between moral and political philosophy is characteristic of contemporary neglect of political philosophy in general.;After giving an overview of previous incorporation of political philosophy in bioethics literature in general and in Kantian bioethics literature in particular, the author explains the difference between moral and political philosophy as Kant saw it, and develops a reading of Kant's political philosophy. Kant's political philosophy is applied to two contemporary bioethics issues. The author argues first that, contrary to the consensus of contemporary Kantians, Kant himself would have supported a market in solid organs, and that this question is necessarily one involving political (and not merely moral) philosophy. Attempts to legally prohibit the sale of kidneys violate innate right, despite the fact that such sales are morally forbidden. Second, it is argued that contemporary notions of autonomy have failed to give a satisfying moral grounding to the legal standards of disclosure governing informed consent. Kant's political philosophy, by appealing to a united will, clarifies the moral authority of a government to set what is essentially an arbitrary, but normatively necessary, set of standards for disclosure.
机译：本文主要研究规范性政治哲学在现代生物伦理学文献中关于法律和公共政策的结合。有人认为，在看起来严格必要的法律和政策问题上，当代生物伦理学文献基本上忽略了对规范性政治哲学的积极利用。作者通过对康德道德哲学在当代有关法律和公共政策的生物伦理学辩论中的运用进行批判性研究，为这一论点辩护。作者认为，康德的道德哲学经常在当代生物伦理学辩论中使用，其方式与康德自己对法律与公共政策的相关性的理解背道而驰。康德不认为适用于分析行动道德的原则可以毫无问题地应用于法律或公共政策问题。未能注意到康德对道德哲学和政治哲学之间的仔细区分，这是当代普遍忽视政治哲学的特征。在概述了先前将政治哲学纳入一般生物伦理学文献，尤其是康德生物伦理学文献之后，作者解释说康德所看到的道德和政治哲学之间的差异，并发展了对康德政治哲学的理解。康德的政治哲学适用于两个当代生物伦理学问题。作者首先认为，与当代康德人的共识相反，康德本人会支持实体器官市场，而这个问题必然是涉及政治（而不仅仅是道德）哲学的问题。尽管在道德上禁止肾脏销售，但试图合法禁止肾脏销售侵犯了先天权利。其次，有人认为，当代的自治概念未能为指导知情同意的公开法律标准提供令人满意的道德基础。康德的政治哲学通过呼吁统一的意志，阐明了政府的道义权威，以制定本质上是武断但规范必需的公开标准。

著录项

  • 作者

    MacDougall, D. Robert.;

  • 作者单位

    Saint Louis University.;

  • 授予单位 Saint Louis University.;
  • 学科 Ethics.;Philosophy.;Health Sciences Medical Ethics.;Health Sciences Medicine and Surgery.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2012
  • 页码 312 p.
  • 总页数 312
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号