Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11651384

A methodological error in bioethics.

J-M Nores
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The author closely examines a flaw in the reasoning used in some studies performed in the field of medical ethics. Firstly, he defines this flaw using analysis of certain cases where the wrong reasons are put forward to defend a moral position -- the person defending a theory or idea uses the wrong reasons which are not arguments confirming the theory upheld but instead are unrelated to the latter. The author then describes several cases. He cites examples of ethical problems where such a flaw in reasoning is present: problems related to vaccination, experiments involving animals, vegetarians' and Jehovah's Witnesses' attitudes, etc. In concluding, the author emphasizes that the arguments put forward in favour of a moral theme must be arguments which are moral and in some cases legal or metaphysical, but not scientific as the question is not scientific -- instead, it is moral.

Explore related subjects

BioethicsEthical AnalysisEthicsMethodsBioethics and Professional EthicsJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J-M Nores. 1992. A methodological error in bioethics.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11651384/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Curricular approaches to research ethics training for psychiatric investigators.

RATIONALE: Training in research ethics is crucial for psychiatric investigators. Addressing ethical dimensions of human subjects research requires knowledge about the rules and norms governing research; sensitivity to ethical implications of actions; and skills in ethics problem solving. Investigators in training who are physicians have the additional challenge of developing identities as investigators that sometimes conflict with their identities as physicians. OBJECTIVES: To propose a curriculum for psychiatric research ethics training. METHODS: Review of literature on ethics education and presentation of a curricular approach to research ethics training for psychiatric investigators. RESULTS: Research ethics can be learned and should be taught. Involvement of active investigators in teaching research ethics is important. While core topics of psychiatric research ethics training have not yet been identified, there are available models from which to draw. Research ethics should be introduced early and integrated throughout the research training period. Lack of resources and institutional support can be obstacles to development of comprehensive research ethics curricula. Small-group, case-based discussion is best for teaching ethics problem-solving skills. Examples of teaching module ideas and a fully developed sample teaching module are presented. CONCLUSIONS: There is opportunity for creative models for teaching psychiatric research ethics. Work is needed to identify core topics, target pedagogical strategies to trainees at different levels, and develop evaluation methods.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2003

[Collective health, the new genetics, and market eugenics].

Due to constant advances in genetic manipulation, the field of public health is faced with the possible emergence of a reductionist genomic emphasis, beyond socio-cultural influences. Under such circumstances, the main focus of public health interventions would shift towards a genomic approach to "individuals" and their "families", to the detriment of their consecrated object - "populations", thereby moving away from the current central priority of efforts (and resources) aimed at reducing ill-health due to socioeconomic inequalities. Even admitting the benefits of genetic knowledge, a new eugenic practice may emerge from the availability of genetic tests on the marketplace aimed at individuals that can afford to consume them.

Bioethics↗