Advertisement

Ethics Education Needs More than the Four Principles: Bioethics Discourse in a Community of Inquiry

  • Leonardo D. de Castro
  • Isidro Manuel C. Valero
Chapter
Part of the Advancing Global Bioethics book series (AGBIO, volume 10)

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.

References

  1. Beauchamp, T.L. 2003. Methods and principles in biomedical ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 29: 269–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beauchamp, T.L., and J.F. Childress. 2009. Principles of Biomedical Ethics (1st edition, 1979; 5th edition 2001). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, A.V.C. 2003. The virtues (and vices) of the four principles. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5): 292–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dubler, N.N. 2011. A ‘principled resolution’: The fulcrum for bioethics mediation. Law and Contemporary Problems 74 (3): 177–200.Google Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gillon, R. 1994. The four principles revisited: A reappraisal. In Principles of Health Care Ethics, ed. R. Gillon, 319–333. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harris, J. 2003. In praise of unprincipled ethics. Journal of Medical Ethics 29: 303–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Huxtable, R. 2013. For and against the four principles, of biomedical ethics. Clinical Ethics 8 (2/3): 39–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lipman, M. 1974. Harry Stotlemeier’s Discovery. Upper Montclair: Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 1978. Suki. Upper Montclair: Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 2003. Thinking in Education. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Montclair State University/Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Macklin, R. 2003. Applying the four principles. Journal of Medical Ethics 29 (5): 275–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 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.Google Scholar
  15. Sharp, A.M. 1987. What is a community of inquiry? Journal of Moral Education. 16 (1): 37–45.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724870160104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. ———. 1991. The community of inquiry: Education for democracy. Thinking 9 (2): 31–37.Google Scholar
  17. 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.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonardo D. de Castro
    • 1
  • Isidro Manuel C. Valero
    • 1
  1. 1.University of the Philippines, DilimanQuezon CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations