The Role of Philosophers in Bioethics.

Abstract

there is no answer to the question of what death “really” is. This kind of possibility is one of the issues discussed recently under the heading of “conceptual engineering” (see, e.g., Burgess, Plunkett, and Cappelen 2020), and it may provide further opportunities for convergence in bioethics. Perhaps we should accept that both concepts, or, if you prefer, “conceptions” of death are potentially helpful; and there is no reason why we should not use both, depending on context. What if disagreement still remains, on theories, concepts, implications, and so on? At this point, bioethicists should recognize that the decision of how to proceed outside the philosophical study is not just an epistemic, but a normative or moral question. There are standard Condorcet-based reasons for thinking that the broader any ethical discussion can be made, other things equal, the stronger the chance of progress and convergence. So once bioethicists have made clear what the issues are— what concepts are in play, and how they can be understood; what practical options are on the table; what various forms of consequentialism and deontology say about them; and so on—they have what we might call a “duty” properly to inform all stakeholders of the issues so that they can decide how to take things forward. Bioethics is itself an ethical enterprise; and the contribution it has been making, and should continue to make, is to the ongoing open and democratic conversation of humanity as a whole about how we should live and act, individually and as a species.