|
The antitheorists' distrust of modern moral theories and their doubt about the possibility of solving moral problems by deductively applying general principles to particular cases have given rise to a variety of alternative approaches to morality.
Primarily among them are principlism, particularism, casuistry, communitarianism, and virtue ethics.
- Principlism
According to principlists Tom Beauchamp and James Childress, theories such as deontology and utilitarianism do not make a significant difference to the resolution of ethical problems. They claim that it is possible to deal effectively with moral problems like those encountered in bioethics by relying on four basic principles: autonomy (allowing others to make their own decisions according to their own personal life plans), nonmaleficence (not doing harm), beneficence (promoting good), and justice (treating others fairly) without appealing to theoretical considerations about their nature and their justification.
- Particularism
Particularists such as Jonathan Dancy and John MacDowell are more radical than principlists; they reject not only theories but principles, rules and norms as well. They maintain that no two situations are similar in all aspects; every situation is unique and needs to be considered on its own merit. Although some consideration could be a reason to perform a particular action in one situation, it may not be a good reason to perform that action in a second situation, and may even be a reason not to perform that action in a third situation. For example, usually the fact that a person borrowed a book from another is a good reason to return it. But if the book happens to be stolen from the library, then the fact that one borrowed the book is no reason to return it to the person he borrowed it from, in fact it seems to counts against doing so. For particularists, therefore, moral competence comes in the form of the possession of a fine sensitivity to the complex features that make a case unique and not an instance of a general principle or rule. While some particularists describe judgment as analogous to vision, others compare it to a craft skill.
- Casuistry
Joining principlists and particularists in rejecting theory are casuists. For Stephen Toulmin, one of the leading proponents of casuistry, appeal to general principles in dealing with moral problems is often an obstacle to their resolution. He points out that the members of the National Commission for the Protection of the Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, of which he is a member, always agree about particular cases as long as they put aside their personal religious, philosophical, and general moral principles. For casuists, moral certainty concerns particular cases. Moral reasoning requires a consideration of particular cases and the will to treat like cases alike. They explain that, to solve an ethical problem, ethicists should start with the identification of uncontroversial and unambiguous cases, cases that are "too clear and simple, too nearly paradigmatic to be in any way problematic or open to doubt." Then, they should identify the salient features of the problematic case and see what paradigmatic case it resembles most. Finally, they should carry over the procedure used to resolve the paradigmatic case to the problematic case. For example, if they are faced with a problematic case in which they cannot decide whether it is autonomy or beneficence that ought to take precedence, they should describe a case in which autonomy clearly takes precedence and another situation in which beneficence takes precedence and then compare the problematic case to the paradigmatic cases. The argument in favor of a particular solution depends on what paradigmatic case the problematic case resembles most.
- Communitarianism
Another antitheoretical position that is gaining in favor is communitarianism, represented by Sandel, Taylor, and MacIntyre. For MacIntyre, moral principles and rules that are the object of moral theories do not have a life of their own. Instead, they are part of the ethos of society along with its foundational historical narratives, traditions, virtues, manners, standards of taste, attitudes, and experiences that guide action and constitute people's identities. As a result, in place of the top- down model of moral reasoning a person has to adopt a particular tradition and focus on its foundational stories and practices for determining how to live and how to solve important moral problems.
- Virtue ethics
A number of antitheorists also advocate some kind of virtue ethics and are indebted to Aristotle's emphasis on practical wisdom and his idea that morality has to do less with principles and rules than with the traits of character that make a person a good person. Among the advocates of virtue ethics are MacDowell, Williams, Nussbaum and Baier. They defend a form of particularism that makes good moral judgments the result of a good character rather than the result of mere intuition.
- Postmodernism
Finally, postmodernists such as Jean-Francois Lyotard state that when someone claims to know what is right or good, it is inevitable that opposition and difference are silenced. Philosophers should stop dreaming up theories and should restrict themselves to a constant disruption of all ideas about morality, truth, justice etc.
- Questions on the readings
- What are the most important characteristics of the four principles of biomedical ethics?
- What, in Beauchamp's and Childress's view, are the justificatory conditions for infringing on a prima facie norm?
- What are the strengths and the weaknesses of the various methods used in bioethics?
- What kind of objections do the antitheorists address traditional moral theories?
- Is it possible to do without moral theories in bioethics? Explain.
|
