论宗教对生命伦理学的影响:多元主义的局限。

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2025-04-28 DOI:10.1111/bioe.13419
Giovanni Spitale, Federico Germani, Brian D Earp, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Maide Barış, Marco Annoni, Kiarash Aramesh, Zohar Lederman, Calvin W L Ho, Karel Caals, Ambra D'Imperio, Marcello Ienca, Shenuka Singh, Debora Spagnolo, Nikola Biller-Andorno
{"title":"论宗教对生命伦理学的影响:多元主义的局限。","authors":"Giovanni Spitale, Federico Germani, Brian D Earp, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Maide Barış, Marco Annoni, Kiarash Aramesh, Zohar Lederman, Calvin W L Ho, Karel Caals, Ambra D'Imperio, Marcello Ienca, Shenuka Singh, Debora Spagnolo, Nikola Biller-Andorno","doi":"10.1111/bioe.13419","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The World Congress of Bioethics held in Qatar in 2024 (WCB 2024) sparked controversy around the role of religion in bioethics, highlighting the need for critical discussions. During the congress, there was a strong push for incorporating religious values into bioethical discourse, raising questions about the validity and implications of such an approach. This paper examines the influence of religious thought on bioethical discussions, and the ongoing debate over the role of religious perspectives in this field. Here, we explore Jecker and colleagues' pluriversal framework, which was proposed at WCB 2024, espousing a bioethical discourse grounded in civility, respect for law, justice, non-domination, and toleration. While the framework aims to embrace the world's cultural and religious diversity, here, we suggest that it struggles with significant ethical inconsistencies, poses challenges for pluralistic dialogue, and may be hard to reconcile with human rights. Through an analysis of Jecker's principles and their application, we discuss the difficulty of integrating conflicting religious views with ethical values and with widely accepted human rights frameworks. We then proceed to examine how and why religions might exert undue influence on bioethics, and we argue for a different future for bioethics.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On Religious Influence in Bioethics: The Limits of Pluriversalism.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Spitale, Federico Germani, Brian D Earp, Sebastian Porsdam Mann, Maide Barış, Marco Annoni, Kiarash Aramesh, Zohar Lederman, Calvin W L Ho, Karel Caals, Ambra D'Imperio, Marcello Ienca, Shenuka Singh, Debora Spagnolo, Nikola Biller-Andorno\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/bioe.13419\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The World Congress of Bioethics held in Qatar in 2024 (WCB 2024) sparked controversy around the role of religion in bioethics, highlighting the need for critical discussions. During the congress, there was a strong push for incorporating religious values into bioethical discourse, raising questions about the validity and implications of such an approach. This paper examines the influence of religious thought on bioethical discussions, and the ongoing debate over the role of religious perspectives in this field. Here, we explore Jecker and colleagues' pluriversal framework, which was proposed at WCB 2024, espousing a bioethical discourse grounded in civility, respect for law, justice, non-domination, and toleration. While the framework aims to embrace the world's cultural and religious diversity, here, we suggest that it struggles with significant ethical inconsistencies, poses challenges for pluralistic dialogue, and may be hard to reconcile with human rights. Through an analysis of Jecker's principles and their application, we discuss the difficulty of integrating conflicting religious views with ethical values and with widely accepted human rights frameworks. We then proceed to examine how and why religions might exert undue influence on bioethics, and we argue for a different future for bioethics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bioethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13419\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.13419","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2024年在卡塔尔举行的世界生命伦理学大会(WCB 2024)引发了围绕宗教在生命伦理学中的作用的争议,强调了批判性讨论的必要性。在大会期间,人们强烈要求将宗教价值观纳入生物伦理论述,这引发了对这种方法的有效性和影响的质疑。本文探讨了宗教思想对生物伦理讨论的影响,以及宗教观点在这一领域的作用。在这里,我们探讨Jecker及其同事在WCB 2024上提出的多元框架,该框架支持以文明、尊重法律、正义、非统治和宽容为基础的生物伦理话语。虽然该框架旨在包容世界的文化和宗教多样性,但在这里,我们认为它与重大的道德不一致作斗争,对多元化对话构成挑战,并且可能难以与人权调和。通过对杰克原则及其应用的分析,我们讨论了将相互冲突的宗教观点与伦理价值观和广泛接受的人权框架相结合的困难。然后,我们继续研究宗教如何以及为什么可能对生命伦理学施加不当影响,我们为生命伦理学的不同未来而争论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On Religious Influence in Bioethics: The Limits of Pluriversalism.

The World Congress of Bioethics held in Qatar in 2024 (WCB 2024) sparked controversy around the role of religion in bioethics, highlighting the need for critical discussions. During the congress, there was a strong push for incorporating religious values into bioethical discourse, raising questions about the validity and implications of such an approach. This paper examines the influence of religious thought on bioethical discussions, and the ongoing debate over the role of religious perspectives in this field. Here, we explore Jecker and colleagues' pluriversal framework, which was proposed at WCB 2024, espousing a bioethical discourse grounded in civility, respect for law, justice, non-domination, and toleration. While the framework aims to embrace the world's cultural and religious diversity, here, we suggest that it struggles with significant ethical inconsistencies, poses challenges for pluralistic dialogue, and may be hard to reconcile with human rights. Through an analysis of Jecker's principles and their application, we discuss the difficulty of integrating conflicting religious views with ethical values and with widely accepted human rights frameworks. We then proceed to examine how and why religions might exert undue influence on bioethics, and we argue for a different future for bioethics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信