{"title":"生命伦理学:以伦理学为中心的跨学科","authors":"E. Brugger","doi":"10.5840/QD20155218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When scholars over the past forty years have proposed definitions of ‘bioethics,’ they have usually addressed the question in terms of methodology:1 do we start with an analytical framework of abstract principles (Beauchamp and Childress),2 or the particularities of individual cases (John Arras, Jonsen and Toulmin);3 do we follow a neo-Kantian method (Alan Donagan),4 a more explicitly Christian approach,5 a narrative-based approach,6 a utilitarian,7 or","PeriodicalId":40384,"journal":{"name":"Quaestiones Disputatae","volume":"11 1","pages":"24 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bioethics: Ethico-Centric Interdisciplinarity\",\"authors\":\"E. Brugger\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/QD20155218\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When scholars over the past forty years have proposed definitions of ‘bioethics,’ they have usually addressed the question in terms of methodology:1 do we start with an analytical framework of abstract principles (Beauchamp and Childress),2 or the particularities of individual cases (John Arras, Jonsen and Toulmin);3 do we follow a neo-Kantian method (Alan Donagan),4 a more explicitly Christian approach,5 a narrative-based approach,6 a utilitarian,7 or\",\"PeriodicalId\":40384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quaestiones Disputatae\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"24 - 37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quaestiones Disputatae\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/QD20155218\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestiones Disputatae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/QD20155218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
When scholars over the past forty years have proposed definitions of ‘bioethics,’ they have usually addressed the question in terms of methodology:1 do we start with an analytical framework of abstract principles (Beauchamp and Childress),2 or the particularities of individual cases (John Arras, Jonsen and Toulmin);3 do we follow a neo-Kantian method (Alan Donagan),4 a more explicitly Christian approach,5 a narrative-based approach,6 a utilitarian,7 or
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
