Abstract
This essay reexamines the four-principle approach to biomedical ethics in the context of ethics education in general and in relation to possible ethics discourse within a community of inquiry in particular. A community of inquiry is the setting for learning and education in philosophy for children. This community enables children to acquire critical thinking and other skills as part of democratic education. The use (or misuse) of the four principles approach tends to contribute to a practice that limits critical thinking skills because of the constraints on the conceptual tools that tend to be used. It has also had the effect of promoting conceptual ambiguity by encouraging the use of limited conceptual molds, thus giving rise to the possibility of multiple interpretations among diverse users, especially in the field of global bioethics. While recognizing the continuing appeal of the approach as a conceptual tool for ethical decision-making the essay brings out the limitations that need to be overcome in order to promote the clarity that the four principles approach is meant to possess.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Beauchamp, T.L. 2003. Methods and principles in biomedical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 29: 269–274.
Beauchamp, T.L., and J.F. Childress. 2009. Principles of Biomedical Ethics (1st edition, 1979; 5th edition 2001). New York: Oxford University Press.
Campbell, A.V.C. 2003. The virtues (and vices) of the four principles. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5): 292–296.
Dubler, N.N. 2011. A ‘principled resolution’: The fulcrum for bioethics mediation. Law and Contemporary Problems 74 (3): 177–200.
Emran, Ahmadi Nasab. 2015. The four-principle formulation of common morality is at the core of bioethics mediation method. Medicine Health Care and Philosophy 18: 371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9612-7.
Gillon, R. 1994. The four principles revisited: A reappraisal. In Principles of Health Care Ethics, ed. R. Gillon, 319–333. New York: Wiley.
———. 2003. Ethics needs principles – four can encompass the rest – and respect for autonomy should be first among equals. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5): 307–312.
Harris, J. 2003. In praise of unprincipled ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 29: 303–306.
Huxtable, R. 2013. For and against the four principles, of biomedical ethics. Clinical Ethics 8 (2/3): 39–43.
Lipman, M. 1974. Harry Stotlemeier’s Discovery. Upper Montclair: Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children.
———. 1978. Suki. Upper Montclair: Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children.
———. 2003. Thinking in Education. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Montclair State University/Cambridge University Press.
Macklin, R. 2003. Applying the four principles. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5): 275–280.
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1978. The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Sharp, A.M. 1987. What is a community of inquiry? Journal of Moral Education. 16 (1): 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724870160104.
———. 1991. The community of inquiry: Education for democracy. Thinking 9 (2): 31–37.
Turgeon, W.C. 1998. Metaphysical Horizons of Philosophy for Children. Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy: Philosophy and Children. Available: http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Chil/ChilTurg.htm. Accessed 15 June 2017.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
de Castro, L.D., Valero, I.M.C. (2018). Ethics Education Needs More than the Four Principles: Bioethics Discourse in a Community of Inquiry. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Global Education in Bioethics. Advancing Global Bioethics, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78984-2_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78984-2_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78983-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78984-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)