Advertisement

The Foundation of Medical Ethics in the Democratic Evolution of Modern Society

  • Diego Gracia
Part of the International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine book series (LIME, volume 26)

Keywords

Deliberative Democracy Moral Consciousness Nicomachean Ethic Discourse Theory Public Deliberation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Plato, Republic 415a.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Plato, Republic 414b.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Plato, Republic 519e.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 1, 2: 1094b 11.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kant I. (1995), Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, in: S.M. Cahn (Ed.), Classics of Western Philosophy, Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, 4th ed., p. 1080 and 1085.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Habermas J. (1990), Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 120, 197.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Habermas J., Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, p. 12 1.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Habermas J. (1996), Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quoted by Habermas J., Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, p. 305.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Habermas J., Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, pp. 305–6.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Emanuel E.J., Emanuel L. L. (1992), Four models of the physician-patient relationship, JAMA, 267(16), pp. 2221–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    The “Committee on the Social and Ethical Impacts of Developments in Biomedicine,” of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, has analysed in a complete report the work made by the different American bioethical commissions. And the conclusion reached is that the goal of these commissions should be what they call “Bioethics Deliberation.” Committee on the Social and Ethical Impacts of Developments in Biomedicine. Society’s Choices: Social and Ethical Decision Making in Biomedicine. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. L. Hines, B. L. (1985), Oregon and American Health Decisions: A Guidefor Community Action on Bioethical Issues, Washington, D.C.: Department of Health and Human Services. Crawshaw R., Garland MJ., Hines B., and Lobitz C. (1985), Oregon Health Decisions: An Experiment with Informed Community Consent, Journal of the American Medical Association, 254, pp. 3213–16. See Emanuel E. J. (1991), The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, pp. 210-12.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Callahan D. (1987), Setting Limits, New York: Simon and Schuster. Callahan D. (1990), What Kind of Life, New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gutmann A. and Thompson D. (1997), Deliberating about Bioethics, Hastings Center Report; 27(3), pp.38–41.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bohman J. (1996), Public Deliberation: Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, p. 9 1.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Emanuel E. J., The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity, p. 23.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rawls J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, p. 359. Quoted by Emanuel E.J., The Ends of Human Life: Medical Ethics in a Liberal Polity, p. 148.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Diego Gracia
    • 1
  1. 1.Complutense University MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations