• English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • English 
    • English
    • français
    • Deutsch
    • español
    • português (Brasil)
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • русский
    • العربية
    • 中文
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Ethics collections
  • Health Ethics
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Ethics collections
  • Health Ethics
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Browse

All of the LibraryCommunitiesPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsThis CollectionPublication DateTitlesSubjectsAuthorsProfilesView

My Account

LoginRegister

The Library

AboutNew SubmissionSubmission GuideSearch GuideRepository PolicyContact

Therapeutic Doubt and Moral Dialogue

  • CSV
  • RefMan
  • EndNote
  • BibTex
  • RefWorks
Author(s)
Solbakk, Jan Helge
Keywords
Consensus
Ethics
Forms
Medical Ethics
Medical Students
Students
Philosophical Ethics
Bioethics

Full record
Show full item record
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/262488
Online Access
http://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Therapeutic+doubt+and+moral+dialogue&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy+&volume=29&issue=1&spage=118&date=2004-02&au=Solbakk,+Jan+Helge
https://dx.doi.org/10.1076/jmep.29.1.93.30409
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/993026
Abstract
This paper aims at analysing the problem of remainder and regret in moral conflicts. Four different approaches are subject of investigation: a moral-theoretical strategy aimed at consistency; a narrative approach of moral coherence and open consensus; Plato's moral methodology of dialogue and aporetic resolution of moral conflicts and finally, an approach deduced from Greek tragedy of emotional resolution of moral conflicts. A central argument is that since there exists no theoretically convincing way of solving the problem of remainder and regret, the attention should instead be directed towards finding alternative ways of coping with this problem. The three last approaches subject of investigation attempt--each in their own way--to do this. Teaching medical ethics to medical students and the burning issue of medical fallibility is used to demonstrate the relevance of these forms of resolution in a medical context.
Date
2016-01-09
Identifier
oai:repository.library.georgetown.edu:10822/993026
doi:10.1076/jmep.29.1.93.30409
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 2004 February; 29(1): 93- 118
http://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Therapeutic+doubt+and+moral+dialogue&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy+&volume=29&issue=1&spage=118&date=2004-02&au=Solbakk,+Jan+Helge
http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/jmep.29.1.93.30409
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/993026
DOI
10.1076/jmep.29.1.93.30409
ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1076/jmep.29.1.93.30409
Scopus Count
Collections
Health Ethics
Philosophical Ethics

entitlement

 
DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
Quick Guide | Contact Us
Open Repository is a service operated by 
Atmire NV
 

Export search results

The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.