Author(s)
Gorovitz, SamuelKeywords
AttitudesAutonomy
Bioethics
Communication
Education
Ethical Analysis
Ethical Relativism
Ethicists
Ethics
Evaluation
Goals
Humanities
Interdisciplinary Communication
Medical Ethics
Medicine
Methods
Morality
Philosophy
Physicians
Review
Social Interaction
Social Sciences
Values
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
http://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Baiting+Bioethics&title=Ethics.+&volume=96&issue=2&pages=356-374&date=1986&au=Gorovitz,+Samuelhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1086/et.1986.96.issue-2
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/726302
Abstract
Various criticisms of bioethics are reported and evaluated in an effort to determine what it is reasonable to expect of this rapidly developing field and what should be its future directions. Specific charges by Renee Fox, Judith Swazey, and William Bennett are explored. Fox and Swazey contend that bioethics champions individualism and pays little attention to social relationships, that bioethicists distance themselves from the human settings where ethical issues are experienced, and that bioethics pretends to a false validity. Bennett indicts bioethics on the grounds that it promotes ethical relativism and moral indifference. Gorovitz argues the case against these contentions but urges ethicists systematically to assess their critics' statements. (KIE abstract)Date
2015-05-05Identifier
oai:repository.library.georgetown.edu:10822/72630210.1086/et.1986.96.issue-2
Ethics. 1986 Jan; 96(2): 356-374.
0014-1704
http://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Baiting+Bioethics&title=Ethics.+&volume=96&issue=2&pages=356-374&date=1986&au=Gorovitz,+Samuel
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/et.1986.96.issue-2
http://hdl.handle.net/10822/726302