Vorsprung durch Technik: On Biotechnology, Bioethics, and Its Beneficiaries
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2011
Bioethics as a distinctive field is undergoing a critical turn. It may be a quiet revolution, but a growing body of scholarship illustrates a perceived need for a rethink of the scope of the field and the approaches and priorities that have carried bioethicists through many heady years of success. Few areas of bioethical practice have been left unexamined, ranging from questions as to the sustainability of the discipline in its current form to the “expertise” of its practitioners; the legitimacy of bioethics in the realms of policymaking; its relationship to philosophy; the purchase of empirical and interdisciplinary method; the relationship of bioethics to the real world; bioethical understandings of the concept of “health” (and methods of attainment); its agenda, priorities, and inclusiveness right up to what might be the overarching question: “What is bioethics all about?” Unsurprisingly, these questions elicit varied responses. Scholars from various disciplines have critiqued fundamental tenets of the “ethics” business, albeit as claims of its “conservatism,” “corruption,” and its questionable “usefulness” suggest, not always with a charitable or constructive eye. But quite crucially and often overlooked, bioethics itself has not shied away from the question as to what bioethics is and what it should become; increasingly apparent is that this kind of self-conscious and reflexive theorizing is regarded as a key priority for taking contemporary ethics forward.
- Special Section: Methodology in Philosophical Bioethics
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011
8. Häyry, M, Takala, T, eds. Scratching the Surface of Bioethics. Amsterdam: Rodopi; 2003.Google Scholar
10. See, for example, note 8, Häyry, Takala 2002.
15. See, for example, Harris, J.Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2007.Google Scholar
28. French, S. Setting a record straight. In: Swain, J, Finkelstein, V, French, S, Oliver, M, eds. Disabling Barriers, Enabling Environments. London: Sage; 1993:24.Google Scholar
32. Asch, A. Why I haven’t changed my mind about prenatal diagnosis: Reflections and refinements. In: Parens, E, Ashe, A, eds. Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2000;234–57.Google Scholar
39. Though allowing many women to exert greater control over their reproductive lives, the reliability of the pill is often overstated, leading to the flawed belief that pregnancy is now effectively optional.
45. See further note 4, Hedgecoe 2004. Hedgecoe notes how bioethical representations of ethics can contrast so profoundly with ethical reasoning on the ground.