Another Defense of Common Morality

被引:1
作者
Macklin, Ruth [1 ]
机构
[1] Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Epidemiol & Populat Hlth, Bronx, NY 10461 USA
关键词
common morality; human rights; global ethics; medical professionals;
D O I
10.1017/S0963180121000578
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Robert Baker and Rosamond Rhodes each argue against the universality "common morality," the approach to ethics that comprises four fundamental principles and their application in various settings. Baker contends that common morality cannot account for cultural diversity in the world and claims that a human rights approach is superior in the context of global health. Rhodes maintains that bioethics is not reducible to common morality because medical professionals have special privileges and responsibilities that people lack in everyday life. Baker fails to demonstrate how the human rights approach to global ethics is more sensitive to culture than the use of bioethics principles that comprise common morality. Rhodes has a narrow interpretation of "common morality," which when understood more broadly, accounts for the special privileges and obligation of medical professionals.
引用
收藏
页码:177 / 184
页数:8
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
Andreopoulos GJ, 2006, NONSTATE ACTORS HUMA, pxv
[2]  
Beauchamp TL., 2018, PRINCIPLES BIOMEDICA
[3]  
Frenkel S., 2021, NEW YORK TIMES, pB1
[4]  
Gettleman J., 2021, The New York Times
[5]  
Kershner Isabel., 2021, NEW YORK TIMES
[6]  
Macklin R., 1999, RELATIVISM CULTURAL
[7]   Common morality and medical ethics: not so different after all [J].
Macklin, Ruth .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2019, 45 (12) :780-781
[8]  
Murphy H., 2021, NEW YORK TIMES 0426
[9]   A Defence of medical ethics as uncommon morality [J].
Rhodes, Rosamond .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2019, 45 (12) :792-793
[10]   Why not common morality? [J].
Rhodes, Rosamond .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2019, 45 (12) :770-777