Suchergebnisse

Is there only one bioethics? Is a global bioethics possible? Or, instead, does one encounter a plurality of bioethical approaches shaped by local cultural and national traditions? Some thirty years ago a field of applied ethics emerged under the rubric `bioethics'. Little thought was given at the time to the possibility that this field bore the imprint of a particular American set of moral commitments. This volume explores the plurality of moral perspectives shaping bioethics. It is inspired by Kazumasa Hoshino's critical reflections on the differences in moral perspectives separating Japanese and American bioethics. The essays include contributions from Hong Kong, China, Japan, Texas, the United States, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. The volume offers a rich perspective of the range of approaches to bioethics. It brings into question whether there is unambiguously one ethics for bioethics to apply

Intro -- Contents -- Contributors -- Author Bios -- Introduction -- Introduction -- Critical Essays -- Conclusion: The Plantation -- References -- Part I: Critical Essays -- Chapter 1: A Critical Appraisal of Engelhardt on the "Enlightenment Project" -- 1.1 Engelhardt on the "Enlightenment Project" -- 1.2 A Competitor Enlightenment Project -- 1.3 Engelhardt's Enlightenment Project -- 1.4 The Attraction of Bioethics Aiming for Reliability -- 1.5 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 2: Diversity in Clinical Ethics -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Educational Aspect -- 2.3 Process Aspect -- 2.4 Philosophical Aspect -- 2.5 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: Recognizing the Difference that Faith Makes: H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr., on Life-Ending Medical Interventions -- 3.1 The Former Position -- 3.2 The Latter Position -- 3.3 Comparing the Positions -- 3.4 Final Comments -- References -- Chapter 4: The Foundations of Secular Bioethics -- 4.1 Immanence Versus Transcendence -- 4.2 Reflections on the Enlightenment Project -- 4.3 Justification and Belief in Clinical Bioethics -- 4.4 Avoiding Liberal Cosmopolitanism -- 4.5 Concluding Remarks -- References -- Chapter 5: Disease, Bioethics, and Philosophy of Medicine: The Contributions of H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. -- 5.1 Introduction -- 5.2 Engelhardt's Philosophy of Disease -- 5.2.1 Why Study Disease? -- 5.2.2 The Descriptive, Explanatory, Evaluative, and Social Dimensions of Disease -- 5.2.2.1 Descriptive Dimension -- 5.2.2.2 Explanatory Dimension -- 5.2.2.3 Evaluative Dimension -- 5.2.2.4 Social Dimensions -- 5.2.2.5 Facts, Theories, Values, and Social Contexts -- 5.3 Disease and Bioethics -- 5.4 Disease, Bioethics, and Philosophy of Medicine -- 5.5 Closing -- References -- Chapter 6: Sanctity of Life: A Study in Ambiguity and Confusion -- 6.1 Religious Perspectives and the Sanctity of Life.

AbstractNon-establishment or do-it-yourself (DIY) science involves individuals who may not have formal training conducting experiments outside of institutional settings. While prior scholarship has examined the motivations and values of those involved in the subset of DIY science known as "DIY biology," little research has addressed how these individuals navigate ethical issues in practice. The present study therefore aimed to understand how DIY biologists identify, approach, and resolve one particular ethical issue—biosafety—in their work. We conducted a digital ethnography of Just One Giant Lab (JOGL), the primary hub for DIY biology during the COVID-19 pandemic, and subsequently conducted interviews with individuals involved with JOGL. We found that JOGL was the first global DIY biology initiative to create a Biosafety Advisory Board and develop formal biosafety guidelines that applied to different groups in multiple locations. There was disagreement, however, regarding whether the Board should have an advisory role or provide mandatory oversight. We found that JOGL practiced ethical gatekeeping of projects that fell outside the limits defined by the Board. Our findings show that the DIY biology community recognized biosafety issues and tried to build infrastructure to facilitate the safe conduct of research.

Regenerative medicine is rich with promethean promises. The use of human embryonic stem cells in research is justified by its advocates in terms of promises to cure a wide range of diseases and disabilities, from Alzheimer's and Parkinsonism to the results of heart attacks and spinal cord injuries. More broadly, there is the promethean allure of being able to redesign human biological nature in terms of the goals and concerns of humans. Needless to say, these allures and promises have provoked a wide range of not just moral but metaphysical reflections that reveal and reflect deep fault-lines in our cultures. The essays in this volume, directly and indirectly, present the points of controversy as they tease out the character of the moral issues that confront any attempt to develop the human regenerative technologies that might move us from a human to a post-human nature. Although one can appreciate the disputes as independently philosophical, they are surely also a function of the conflict between a Christian and a post-Christian culture, in that Christianity has from its beginning recognized a fundamental prohibition against the taking of early human life. Even the philosophical disputes that frame secular bioethics are often motivated and shaped by these background cultural conflicts. These essays display this circumstance in rich ways.

This volume provides a unique perspective on the market reforms currently taking place in Chinese health care. The authors come to grips with the changes taking place in Chinese health care and its effect on the traditional doctor-patient relationship, but also its positive effects on the availability and quality of health care particularly in urban areas. In doing so the various authors wrestle with moral, political and social issues deeply ingrained in Chinese culture as well as the perceived practical and moral difficulties associated with the change to a market oriented economy especially