Abstract
The subject matter of ethics is morality, and ethics deals with it in four different though closely related ways: by analysis, by criticism, by norm construction, and by moral pragmatics.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Aldo Leopold: “The land ethic”, in: Aldo Leopold: A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There, New York: Oxford University Press 1949, p. 203.
Cf. Dieter Birnbacher: “Schopenhauers Idee einer rekonstruktiven Ethik (mit Anwendungen auf die moderne Medizin-Ethik)”, in: Schopenhauer-Jahrbuch 71, 1990, pp.26–44.
Cf. Dieter Birnbacher: “Induktion oder Expression? Zu Schopenhauers Metaphilosophie”, in: Schopenhauer-Jahrbuch 69, 1988, pp. 7–19.
Tom L. Beauchamp and James F. Childress: Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 3rd ed., New York: Oxford University Press 1989.
Cf. Kurt Bayertz: “Praktische Philosophie als angewandte Ethik”, in: Kurt Bayertz (ed.): Praktische Philosophie. Grundorientierungen angewandter Ethik, Reinbek: Rowohlt 1991, p34.
Cf. Hans-Ludwig Schreiber et al.: “Entwurf eines Transplantationsgesetzes”, in: Richard Toellner (ed.): Organtransplantation- Beiträge zu ethischen undjuristischen Fragen, Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1991, pp. 105–108.
One is tempted to explain the obvious differences between today’s “bioethical cultures” along the same lines: Each culture adds its own specific principles to the “core principles” listed by Beauchamp and Childress. A case in point is the “Appleton consensus” of 1989 on the criteria for withholding medical treatment (cf. John Stanley: “The Appleton consensus”, in: Journal of Medical Ethics 15, 1989, pp.129–136). That a consensus was reached seems to depend in part on the fact that the great majority of the 33 participants came from countries with the same - Anglo-Saxon - “bioethical culture” (USA, Great Britain, the Netherlands), none from Germany or the South or East European countries. Nearly all of the “dissenting votes” insisting on a more extensive protection of human life came from the few delegates from Israel.
Ludwig Wittgenstein: Über Gewißheit, § 253.
Jürgen Baumann et al.: Alternativentwurf eines Gesetzes über Sterbehilfe, Stuttgart: Georg Thieme 1986.
Cf. Deutscher Juristentag: Recht auf den eigenen Tod? Strafrecht im Spannungsverhältnis zwischen Lebenserhaltungspflicht und Selbstbestimmung. Sitzungsbericht M zum 56. Deutschen Juristentag Berlin 1986, München: Beck 1986, p. 156.
For a similar procedure see Peter Singer: “Reasoning towards Utilitarianism”, in: Douglas Seanor and N. Fotion (eds.): Hare and Critics. Essays on Moral Thinking, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1988, pp. 147–160.
Cf. Dieter Birnbacher: “Embryonenforschung- Ethische Kriterien der Entscheidungsfindung”, in: Christoph Fuchs (ed.): Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Forschung an Embryonen, Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer 1990, pp. 147–158.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Birnbacher, D. (1994). Two Methods of Doing Bioethics. In: Pauer-Studer, H. (eds) Norms, Values, and Society. Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2454-8_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-2454-8_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4458-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-2454-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive