人权与伦理学:科技、尊严与跨文化视野——“第五届人权与伦理学论坛”述要

<正>人权建基于对人的内在价值和尊严的承认,是建构道德体系的基石,也是伦理学的思想归宿,因此人权与伦理学之间存在着极为重要的内在关系。在科技迅猛发展与全球化进程日益加速的现代社会,与人权紧密相关的道德困境与伦理挑战层出不穷,人权伦理学急需对此认真回应。为检视人权与伦理学的最新研究成果和前沿发展状况,中国社会科学院应用伦理研究中心和广西大学公共管理学院于2015年10月24~25日在广西南宁共同举办了"第五届人权与伦理学论坛"。来自全国的四十余位研究者与会,围绕人权与现代社会、科技与人权、尊严与人权、权利观念反思等主题展开了深入探讨。一、人权与现代社会     

欧美生命伦理委员会的机构建设与咨询服务

在当今国际世界,生命伦理学已经发展成一种国际性的"社会运动",成为学术界和公众关注的热点领域。在欧美国家健全和完善现代医疗保健制度过程中,"生命伦理委员会"起到至关重要的作用,它不仅促使人们从伦理学角度探索"我/我们应当如何决定和行为"的问题,也推动社会从制度建构和文化塑造层面回答"政府应当如何行为"、"如何增进公民的生命伦理意识"等问题,并从哲学领域深入探索如何应对生命伦理学理论与实践中的复杂问题与困境,论证相关伦理选择及其实践的合理性。20世纪60年代以来,欧美社会生命伦理学在机构建设、咨询服务和思维方式等方面的经验可以为中国生命伦理学学科发展及生命伦理委员会建设提供有益的参考。     

儒家伦理对当代生命伦理学发展的价值及其局限

对于当代生命伦理学的发展而言,儒家伦理提供了一种理论资源和研究进路,有积极的价值和意义.但是,一方面,儒学是一个历史概念,儒家伦理有其历史局限性和文化相对性,另方面,生命伦理学有不同于传统伦理学的性质、任务和方法,因此,对当代生命伦理学的发展而言,儒家伦理的价值也是有限的.儒家伦理不能自发地成为当代生命伦理学的理论基础、分析工具和核心价值.只有在认真地清理传统儒家伦理的基础上,在不断地对儒学进行"现代诠释"或称之为"儒学创新"的基础上,所构建的儒家生命伦理学才能在后现代多元文化处境中占有一席之地,对当代生命伦理学的发展做出贡献.     

流行病防控的伦理分析

目前学界对流行病防控的伦理探讨尚十分欠缺,而现有的生命医学伦理学理论不能较好地解决流行病防控中的伦理问题,应用伦理学亟需对流行病防控做出伦理回应。流行病防控中主要涉及隐私、自由和正义三个方面的伦理问题,亦即个人权利或自由与公共健康的冲突问题。流行病防控对个人行为的家长主义干预,特别是对个人自愿自涉行为的强家长主义干预必须得到伦理证明。流行病防控与社会正义和人权也有十分密切的关系,促进正义与保护人权是流行病防控的应有之意。     

论高新生命科学技术发展的伦理困境复杂性

当下高新生命科学技术在发展过程中面临着诸多伦理困境,而其复杂性超过了一般性的医学道德问题。高新生命科学技术伦理困境的复杂性源于三个因素:当下后现代道德多元化的复杂性所引发的生命伦理问题多元化;高新生命科学技术不仅干预身体机能,还引发超身体干预;中国当下生命伦理学应对的复杂性。中国话语体系下的生命伦理学探索是值得发展的路径,但如何整合传统文化、西方传入文化和当下中国现代文化,以解决中国本土的生命伦理问题,任重而道远。     

人权、法律、伦理——第二届人权与伦理学论坛

目前,人权与伦理学的研讨业已成为一个国际性前沿话题。2010年4月23-25日,由中国社会科学院哲学研究所伦理学研究室主办的首届人权与伦理学论坛在北京召开。为继续推进人权与伦理问题的研究,2011年10月20-23日,由中国社会科学院哲学研究所伦理学研究室和西南大学政治与公共管     

人权视域的伦理问题——第二届人权与伦理学论坛述评

2011年10月20日至23日,由中国社会科学院哲学所伦理室主办、西南大学政治与公共管理学院承办的"第二届人权与伦理学论坛"在重庆西南大学隆重召开.来自中国社会科学院、武汉大学、西南大学、复旦大学、上海师范大学、江西社科院等单位的专家学者及伦理学专业的研究生立足人权视角,就人权基础理论、人权与应用伦理问题展开了激烈讨论.一、人权基础理论人权基础理论的讨论主要围绕人权的内涵、本质,以及基于伦理史的人权理论两个层面展开.其一,人权的内涵、本质.中国社科院甘绍平研究员主张,人权是人之为人的最基本的权利.他认为伦理学的出发点是人的本质规定性,即人的意志与行为的自主性和人的利益需求性.     

关注焦点:女性主义伦理学、发展理论与人权

从两个方面探讨--强调全球性的关注和女性主义伦理学的交叉:人权及发展理论.首先,对以权利为基础的理论进行批评.其次,在人权运动中,努力考虑全球的健康问题.尔后,采纳可选择的范例是,寻求结合发展和人权理论形成一个全球伦理.最后,对于全球女性主义伦理学提出一个可选择的框架,对于实践有更充分的应答,以加强所有人享受健康及生育的能力.     

改革开放以来我国人权伦理学研究述评

改革开放以来,人权已成为我国市场经济、民主政治和宪法法律的基本价值诉求。而这一价 值观念的巨大变迁, 要归因于我国社会主义市场经济的建立和发展。市场经 济重塑着一个社会的价值理念、行为模式和运行规则。人权伦理是社会主义市场经济和民主 政治的必然要求,是现代法律运行的社会基础。与此同时,人权伦理在现代道德体系中也居 于最核心的地位。人权在本质上是一种道德权利。经过哲学、伦理学界学者们几十年的艰辛 探索,有关人权的道德基础(或道德论证)、道德内涵以及人权伦理的实践应用等理论研究 也逐步走向成熟与深化。     

人权进入道德语境的合理性——第六届“全国人权与伦理学论坛”综述

正由中国社会科学院应用伦理研究中心主办的第六届"全国人权与伦理学论坛"于2017年10月21-22日在深圳举行。论坛中,"人权进入道德语境的合理性"这一议题得到了与会者的高度关注,专家学者从人权的普遍性范式、人权的现实目的以及人权与道德关系的理论困境等三个层面展开了热烈而深入的探讨。一、人权是一种具有普遍性的范式与会者为人权进入道德语境的合理性进行辩护的一个方面,即在于证明人权同道德话语在性质     

UNESCO’s Activities in Ethics

UNESCO is an intergovernmental organization with 193 Member States. It is concerned with a broad range of issues regarding education, science and culture. It is the only UN organisation with a mandate in science. Since 1993 it is addressing ethics of science and technology, with special emphasis on bioethics. One major objective of the ethics programme is the development of international normative standards. This is particularly important since many Member States only have a limited infrastructure in bioethics, lacking expertise, educational programs, bioethics committees and legal frameworks. UNESCO has recently adopted the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. The focus of current activities is now on implementation of this Declaration. Three activities are discussed that aim at improving and reinforcing the ethics infrastructure in relation to science and technology: the Global Ethics Observatory, the Ethics Education Programme and the Assisting Bioethics Committees project.     

Respecting difference and moving beyond regulation: tasks for U.S. bioethics commissions in the twenty-first century

This article focuses on two possible missions for a national bioethics commission. The first is handling differences of worldview, political orientation, and discipline. Recent work in political philosophy emphasizes regard for the dignity of difference manifested in "conversation" that seeks understanding rather than agreement. The President's Council on Bioethics gets a mixed review in this area. The second is experimenting with prophetic bioethics. "Prophetic bioethics" is a term coined by Daniel Callahan to describe an alternative to compromise-seeking "regulatory bioethics." It involves a critique of modern medicine. In the contemporary context, the areas of biotechnology and access to health care cry out for prophetic attention. The Council has addressed biotechnology; unfortunately, that experience suggests that the kind of prophecy that it practices poses risks to conversation. With regard to access issues, the article proposes an effort that unites themes of human dignity, solidarity, and limits in support of reform, while highlighting, rather than papering over, differences.     

Evaluating ‘Bioethical Approaches’ to Human Rights

In recent years there has been growing scholarly interest in the relationship between bioethics and human rights. The majority of this work has proposed that the normative and institutional frameworks of human rights can usefully be employed to address those bioethical controversies that have a global reach: in particular, to the genetic modification of human beings, and to the issue of access to healthcare. In response, a number of critics have urged for a degree of caution about applying human rights to such controversies. In particular, they have claimed that human rights have unresolved distributive and foundational problems. Interestingly, however, some of these critics have gone on to suggest that it might be possible to draw on certain bioethical insights to remedy these problems with human rights. This paper evaluates these recent attempts to apply insights from bioethics to the theory and practice of human rights. It argues that while these insights do not constitute an entirely new and original contribution to human rights thinking, they do force human rights scholars and campaigners to reflect on some key issues. First of all, they force us to question the prevalent idea that human rights are always ‘inviolable trumps’. Secondly, they demand that we pay close attention to the ‘fairness’ of the institutions we charge with determining our concrete rights. And finally, and perhaps most radically, these insights challenge the notion that human rights are held exclusively by members of the human species.     

生命伦理学的知识场域与现象学问题

生命伦理学还不是一个成熟的学科,研究者还要做许多重要的工作。目前,生命伦理学研究中首要的是对相关知识、基本概念、语词的统一,诸如对生命、医学、疾病、死亡等确立生命伦理语境下的认知,是一项重要的任务。应该挖掘所有人类的理性遗产和文化资源,建立和构建生命伦理学理论框架和体系,从而解决对具体生命伦理问题和现象评价的困难。生命伦理学存在一个多维的知识场域,揭示、解释和勾绘这个场域,对生命伦理学的学科建设具有重要意义。     

群体健康与关系“正义”

生命伦理学具有广泛性和综合性,着眼于群体健康是当前生命伦理学发展的趋势。在群体水平的生命伦理学的研究中,有关“正义”的概念是核心的问题。涛慕思·W·博格提出了正义的“关系概念”,借以考察范围广泛的社会制度与健康结果的产生具有什么样的因果关系,进而强调社会制度的制定者和支持者对其产生的健康结果负有责任。通过对此“关系概念”进行分析,以期对中国国内健康领域问题的解决有所启示。     

Lessons in conflict of interest: the construction of the martyrdom of David Healy and the dilemma of bioethics

Bioethics journals have lagged behind medical and science journals in exploring the threat of conflict of interest (COI) to the integrity of publications. Some recent discussions of COI that have occurred in the bioethics literature are reviewed. Discussions of what has been termed the "Healy affair" unintentionally demonstrate that the direct and indirect influence of undisclosed COI may come from those who call for protection from the undue influence of industry. Paradoxically, the nature and tone of current discussions may serve to dull sensitivities to what is indeed a serious set of issues facing bioethics. Some proposals are presented to address COI and other challenges to the integrity of bioethics and its journals. COI is too important a topic to be left to ideologues, and there is no substitute for readers' caution and skepticism as tools in dealing with the full range of biases that exist in published papers.     

生命伦理学的知识场域与现象学问题

目前,生命伦理学研究中最首要的是,对相关知识、基本概念、语词的统一。应该挖掘所有人类的理性遗产和文化资源,建立和构建生命伦理学理论框架和体系,从而解决对具体生命伦理问题和现象评价的困难。生命伦理学存在一个多维的知识场域,揭示、解释和勾绘这个场域,对生命伦理学的学科建设,具有重要意义。     

A proposal for teaching bioethics in high schools using appropriate visual education tools

Teaching bioethics with visual education tools, such as movies and comics, is a unique way of explaining the history and progress of human research and the art and science of medicine to high school students. For more than a decade, bioethical concepts have appeared in movies, and these films are useful for teaching medical and research ethics in high schools. Using visual tools to teach bioethics can have both interpretational and transformational effects on learners that will enhance their overall understanding of complex moral and legal issues in medicine and research.High school students are uniquely suited to learn bioethics because they will soon become legal adults. As adults, they will make moral decisions that may affect their health and wellbeing as well as that of their communities and societies.However, not all visual education tools are appropriate for bioethics pedagogy in high school. Bioethics film and comic producers must consider the specifics of student age, race, gender, belief, level of education, and sexual orientation. Such tools must not be dominated by either dystopic or utopic genres, must aim for objectivity, and must consider the complexity of ethical decision making. It is critical that the teacher, who is the final arbiter regarding the use of visual tools in the classroom, determines that the visual learning tool is acceptable for students in any particular education context. In addition, during the conceptualization and creation of these tools, bioethics film and comic producers must work harder to ensure that these visual tools are devoid of any form of stereotyping.     

Lessons in Conflict of Interest: The Construction of the Martyrdom of David Healy and The Dilemma of Bioethics

Bioethics journals have lagged behind medical and science journals in exploring the threat of conflict of interest (COI) to the integrity of publications. Some recent discussions of COI that have occurred in the bioethics literature are reviewed. Discussions of what has been termed the “Healy affair” unintentionally demonstrate that the direct and indirect influence of undisclosed COI may come from those who call for protection from the undue influence of industry. Paradoxically, the nature and tone of current discussions may serve to dull sensitivities to what is indeed a serious set of issues facing bioethics. Some proposals are presented to address COI and other challenges to the integrity of bioethics and its journals. COI is too important a topic to be left to ideologues, and there is no substitute for readers' caution and skepticism as tools in dealing with the full range of biases that exist in published papers.     

Reflections on public bioethics: a view from the trenches

For many reasons, and more than its predecessors, the President's Council on Bioethics has been the subject of much public attention and heated controversy. But little of that attention and controversy has been informed by knowledge of the Council's mission, its ways of working, and, most importantly, its actual work. This essay describes the Council's mission, discusses its public ways of working, and reviews the five major works produced during the Council's first term. In all its activities, the Council has sought to develop a richer bioethics, one that recognizes and tries to do justice to the deep issues of our humanity raised by the age of biotechnology. Believing that these issues are properly matters to be discussed and governed by the polity as a whole, the Council also has sought to contribute to a genuinely public or political bioethics, beyond the rule of "experts," scientific and bioethical.