Critical bioethics: a new paradigm for the era of techno-feudalism.

IF 3.6 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Medicine Health Care and Philosophy Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-11 DOI:10.1007/s11019-026-10360-4
Giovanni Rubeis
{"title":"Critical bioethics: a new paradigm for the era of techno-feudalism.","authors":"Giovanni Rubeis","doi":"10.1007/s11019-026-10360-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The rise of right-wing political movements supported by key players from big tech is transforming Western societies. This so-called techno-feudalism also implies challenges for bioethics. Racist agendas, intentional misinformation on health topics such as vaccinations, banned words and research topics in public institutions, and the massive funding of questionable biomedical research projects undermine health equity, patient safety, and autonomy. This new sociopolitical situation exacerbates a long-standing issue in healthcare that bioethics hitherto mostly failed to address adequately: societal power asymmetries that shape the roles and relationships of actors in healthcare and biomedical research. Although attempts have been made to reflect upon this issue, e.g. in feminist or postcolonial bioethics, there is no coherent bioethical approach that fundamentally focuses on power asymmetries as a lens of bioethical inquiry. In this article, I therefore introduce critical bioethics, an approach that takes epistemic lenses from critical theory, especially the so-called Frankfurt School. These epistemic lenses-totality and embeddedness, instrumental reason, dialectics and emancipation-allow us to uncover the societal causes for ethical issues in healthcare and biomedical research. Based on this methodological foundation, critical bioethics addresses health inequity as a result of power asymmetries by understanding individuals as fundamentally embedded in a concrete socioeconomic context. Through the lens of instrumental reason, it addresses the connection between disruptive technological innovations and economic interests in terms of commodification and solutionism. By using dialectics as a method to uncover contradictions in the way bioethics understands its principles, it provides an emancipatory perspective for normativity that separates it from affirmative forms of bioethical thinking that simply reproduce the suppressive status quo.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":"585-593"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13633957/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-026-10360-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The rise of right-wing political movements supported by key players from big tech is transforming Western societies. This so-called techno-feudalism also implies challenges for bioethics. Racist agendas, intentional misinformation on health topics such as vaccinations, banned words and research topics in public institutions, and the massive funding of questionable biomedical research projects undermine health equity, patient safety, and autonomy. This new sociopolitical situation exacerbates a long-standing issue in healthcare that bioethics hitherto mostly failed to address adequately: societal power asymmetries that shape the roles and relationships of actors in healthcare and biomedical research. Although attempts have been made to reflect upon this issue, e.g. in feminist or postcolonial bioethics, there is no coherent bioethical approach that fundamentally focuses on power asymmetries as a lens of bioethical inquiry. In this article, I therefore introduce critical bioethics, an approach that takes epistemic lenses from critical theory, especially the so-called Frankfurt School. These epistemic lenses-totality and embeddedness, instrumental reason, dialectics and emancipation-allow us to uncover the societal causes for ethical issues in healthcare and biomedical research. Based on this methodological foundation, critical bioethics addresses health inequity as a result of power asymmetries by understanding individuals as fundamentally embedded in a concrete socioeconomic context. Through the lens of instrumental reason, it addresses the connection between disruptive technological innovations and economic interests in terms of commodification and solutionism. By using dialectics as a method to uncover contradictions in the way bioethics understands its principles, it provides an emancipatory perspective for normativity that separates it from affirmative forms of bioethical thinking that simply reproduce the suppressive status quo.

批判生命伦理学:技术封建主义时代的新范式。
由大型科技公司关键人物支持的右翼政治运动的兴起正在改变西方社会。这种所谓的技术封建主义也意味着对生命伦理的挑战。种族主义议程、关于健康主题(如疫苗接种)的故意错误信息、公共机构禁止使用的词语和研究主题,以及对可疑生物医学研究项目的大量资助,破坏了健康公平、患者安全和自主权。这种新的社会政治形势加剧了医疗保健领域一个长期存在的问题,而迄今为止,生物伦理学大多未能充分解决这个问题:社会权力不对称塑造了医疗保健和生物医学研究中行动者的角色和关系。尽管在女权主义或后殖民时代的生物伦理学中已经尝试反思这个问题,但没有一个连贯的生物伦理学方法从根本上关注权力不对称,作为生物伦理学研究的一个镜头。因此,在本文中,我将介绍批判生命伦理学,这是一种从批判理论,特别是所谓的法兰克福学派中获取认知视角的方法。这些认知视角——整体性和嵌入性、工具理性、辩证法和解放——使我们能够揭示医疗保健和生物医学研究中伦理问题的社会原因。基于这一方法论基础,批判生物伦理学通过理解个人从根本上植根于具体的社会经济背景,解决了权力不对称导致的健康不平等问题。通过工具理性的视角,它从商品化和解决方案主义的角度阐述了颠覆性技术创新与经济利益之间的联系。通过使用辩证法作为一种方法来揭示生命伦理学理解其原则的方式中的矛盾,它为规范性提供了一种解放的视角,将其与仅仅复制压抑现状的肯定形式的生命伦理学思维区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书