|
Showing 1 - 7 of
7 matches in All Departments
What is the relationship between scientific research and ethics?
Some think that science should be free from ethical and political
considerations. Biomedical Research and Beyond argues that ethical
guidance is essential for all forms of inquiry, including
biomedical and scientific research. By addressing some of the most
controversial questions of biomedical research, such as embryonic
research, animal research, and genetic enhancement research, the
author argues for a rich moral framework for the ethics of inquiry,
based on the ideal of human flourishing. He then looks at other
areas of inquiry, such as journalistic ethics, and military
investigation, to see how similar they are to the ethics of
scientific research. Finally, he looks at the virtues that must
play a role in any life that is devoted to research and inquiry as
a vocational commitment.
What is the relationship between scientific research and ethics?
Some think that science should be free from ethical and political
considerations. Biomedical Research and Beyond argues that ethical
guidance is essential for all forms of inquiry, including
biomedical and scientific research. By addressing some of the most
controversial questions of biomedical research, such as embryonic
research, animal research, and genetic enhancement research, the
author argues for a rich moral framework for the ethics of inquiry,
based on the ideal of human flourishing. He then looks at other
areas of inquiry, such as journalistic ethics, and military
investigation, to see how similar they are to the ethics of
scientific research. Finally, he looks at the virtues that must
play a role in any life that is devoted to research and inquiry as
a vocational commitment.
If natural law arguments struggle to gain traction in contemporary
moral and political discourse, could it be because we moderns do
not share the understanding of nature on which that language was
developed? Building on the work of important thinkers of the last
half-century, including Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin, John Finnis,
and Bernard Lonergan, the essays in Concepts of Nature compare and
contrast classical, medieval, and modern conceptions of nature in
order to better understand how and why the concept of nature no
longer seems to provide a limit or standard for human action. These
essays also evaluate whether a rearticulation of pre-modern ideas
(or perhaps a reconciliation or reconstitution on modern terms) is
desirable and/or possible. Edited by R. J. Snell and Steven F.
McGuire, this book will be of interest to intellectual historians,
political theorists, theologians, and philosophers.
Lying and Christian Ethics defends the controversial absolute view
of lying, which maintains that an assertion contrary to the
speaker's mind is always wrong, regardless of the speaker's
intentions. Whereas most people believe that a lie told for a good
cause, such as protecting Jews from discovery by Nazis, is morally
acceptable, Christopher Tollefsen argues that Christians should
support the absolute view. He looks back to the writings of
Augustine and Aquinas to illustrate that lying violates the basic
human goods of integrity and sociality and severely compromises the
values of religion and truth. He critiques the comparatively
permissive views espoused by Cassian, Bonhoeffer, and Niebuhr and
argues that lies often jeopardize the good causes for which they
are told. Beyond framing a moral absolute against lying, this book
explores the questions of to whom we owe the truth and when, and
what steps we may take when we should not give it."
If natural law arguments struggle to gain traction in contemporary
moral and political discourse, could it be because we moderns do
not share the understanding of nature on which that language was
developed? Building on the work of important thinkers of the last
half-century, including Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin, John Finnis,
and Bernard Lonergan, the essays in Concepts of Nature compare and
contrast classical, medieval, and modern conceptions of nature in
order to better understand how and why the concept of nature no
longer seems to provide a limit or standard for human action. These
essays also evaluate whether a rearticulation of pre-modern ideas
(or perhaps a reconciliation or reconstitution on modern terms) is
desirable and/or possible. Edited by R. J. Snell and Steven F.
McGuire, this book will be of interest to intellectual historians,
political theorists, theologians, and philosophers.
Lying and Christian Ethics defends the controversial absolute view
of lying, which maintains that an assertion contrary to the
speaker's mind is always wrong, regardless of the speaker's
intentions. Whereas most people believe that a lie told for a good
cause, such as protecting Jews from discovery by Nazis, is morally
acceptable, Christopher Tollefsen argues that Christians should
support the absolute view. He looks back to the writings of
Augustine and Aquinas to illustrate that lying violates the basic
human goods of integrity and sociality and severely compromises the
values of religion and truth. He critiques the comparatively
permissive views espoused by Cassian, Bonhoeffer, and Niebuhr and
argues that lies often jeopardize the good causes for which they
are told. Beyond framing a moral absolute against lying, this book
explores the questions of to whom we owe the truth and when, and
what steps we may take when we should not give it."
In Subjectivity, sixteen leading scholars examine the turn to the
subject in modern philosophy and consider its historical
antecedents in ancient and medieval thought. Some critics of
modernity reject the turn to the subject as a specifically modern
error, arguing that it logically leads to nihilism and moral
relativism by divorcing the human mind from objective reality. Yet,
some important thinkers of the last half-century--including Leo
Strauss, Eric Voegelin, John Finnis, and Bernard Lonergan--consider
a subjective starting point and claim to find a similar position in
ancient and medieval thought. If correct, their positions suggest
that one can adopt the subjective turn and remain true to the
tradition. This is a timely question. The common good of our polity
encounters a situation in which many believe that there is no
objective reality to which human minds and wills ought to conform,
a conclusion that suggests we can define and construct reality. In
light of this, the notion of a natural or objective reality to
which human beings ought to conform becomes particularly vital.
Should we, then, adopt the modern turn to subjectivity and argue
for objective truth and moral order on its basis, or reject the
subjective turn as part of the problem and return to an earlier
approach that grounds these things in nature or some other external
reality? Critics of modern subjectivity argue that the modern turn
to subjectivity must be abandoned because it is the very source of
the nominalism that threatens to undermine liberal democracy.
Others argue, however, that subjectivity itself logically leads to
the recognition of an objective reality beyond the mind of the
individual. Edited by R. J. Snell and Steven F. McGuire, this
collection will be of particular interest to intellectual
historians, political philosophers, theologians, and philosophers.
|
You may like...
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
Loot
Nadine Gordimer
Paperback
(2)
R398
R330
Discovery Miles 3 300
|