Bridging the Gap Between Ethical Theory and Practice in Medicine: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Study

Science and Engineering Ethics - Physicians try hard to alleviate mental and physical ailments of their patients. Thus, they are heavily burdened by observing ethics and staying well-informed while...     

An Absolutist Theory of Faultless Disagreement in Aesthetics

Some philosophers writing on the possibility of faultless disagreement have argued that the only way to account for the intuition that there could be disagreements which are faultless in every sense is to accept a relativistic semantics. In this article we demonstrate that this view is mistaken by constructing an absolutist semantics for a particular domain – aesthetic discourse – which allows for the possibility of genuinely faultless disagreements. We argue that this position (Humean absolutism) is an improvement over previous absolutist responses to the relativist's challenge and that it presents an independently plausible account of the semantics of aesthetic discourse.     

Counselor Ethical Reasoning: Decision‐Making Practice Versus Theory

Counselors’ decision‐making processes have received little attention in the literature. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the ethical decision‐making practices of counselors working in the field. The results of a phenomenological study indicate that linear models and an orientation to professional ethical guidelines learned in graduate training serve as a foundation, yet not a practical guide, in professional ethical decision making. The authors found that 4 themes guide counselors’ ethical decision making: personal values, clients’ best interest, transparency in decision making, and perceptions of formal training and practice. Implications for practice and counselor education are provided, with recommendations for future research.     

How Ethical Theory Can Improve Practice: Lessons from Abu Ghraib

Abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq confront us with the question of how seemingly ordinary soldiers could have perpetrated harms against prisoners. In this essay I argue that a Stoic approach to the virtues can provide a bulwark against the social and personal forces that can lead to abusive behavior. In part one, I discuss Abu Ghraib. In two, I examine social psychological explanations of how ordinary, apparently decent people are able to commit atrocities. In three, I address a series of questions: why should we turn to ethics for help with these problems, and why, in particular, to Stoicism instead of other ethical theories, such as utilitarianism or Kantianism? Given the power of situations in influencing behavior, is a turn to character ethics a viable response to problems such as those at Abu Ghraib? I argue in part four that character formation drawing on Stoic values can provide soldiers with the inner resilience to resist the situational factors that press them to unwarranted aggression.     

From Theory to Practice: Facing Ethical Challenges as a Clinical Intern

Although formal ethics classes provide a basic foundation in managing ethical dilemmas, professionals often point to their experiences on internship as an important training ground for consolidation of their ethical development. Clinical interns face many personal and professional transitions that can lead to a number of ethical dilemmas. Effective collaboration between administrative staff, supervisors, and interns can create a pragmatic model for negotiating these dilemmas. In this paper, issues related to balancing intern competency with training and patient/client needs, managing dual relationships with supervisory staff, and dealing with differences in orientation are addressed from the perspective of both the site and the intern. We also discuss ways in which problems can arise and how both sides can work together systematically to negotiate those problems. To illustrate this process, we discuss cases involving effective collaboration between interns and sites. Finally, the authors assert the need for formal, empirically supported training in classic ethical issues, but also in contemporary ethical issues arising from the ever-evolving field of mental health service delivery and unique challenges accompanying these advances.     

Ethical Issues in Private Practice

Abstract

A psychoanalytic experience with Herb Strean is described as facilitating the author's personal evolution of competencies required for a successful marriage. Rather than focusing on the familiar difficulties that often beset marriage, eight core competencies (capacity for commitment, emotional maturity, tolerance for imperfections, unconscious wisdom, mature dependence, capacity for oedipal success, capacity to face existential realities, and capacity for humor and playfulness) are delineated. Many people develop these competencies from fortunate internalizations of effectively loving parental couples. Others are able to do this via supplemental mentoring experiences. The author's mentoring was received during the course of two psychoanalyses with Herb Strean.     

Exploring Ethical Pharmacy Practice in Jordan

Science and Engineering Ethics - Patient-centered pharmacy practice involves increased pharmacist engagement in patient care. This increased involvement can sometimes require diverse...     

Disagreement

There has been a recent explosion of interest in the epistemology of disagreement. Much of the recent literature is concerned with a particular range of puzzle cases (discussed in the “Cases” section of my paper). Almost all of the papers that contribute to that recent literature make mention of questions about religious disagreement in ways that suggest that there are interesting connections between those puzzle cases and real life cases of religious disagreement. One important aim of my paper is to cast doubt on that suggestion. More generally, the aim of my paper is to give a reasonably full account of the recent literature on the epistemology of disagreement, and then to give a serious discussion of some of the epistemological issues that are raised by real world religious disagreements.     

ART伦理督导的实践与评价

在生殖中心(医院)中,将伦理原则的学习与技术规范的掌握相结合,将伦理学评价与员工的奖惩机制相结合,将伦理学研究与管理骨干的培养相结合,将伦理原则的贯彻与工作总结相结合;发挥医学伦理委员会监督的权威作用,重视群众监督手段的督促作用,借助国家行政督导机构和行业法规的震慑作用,是ART增强道德约束能力的有效机制。     

ART伦理督导的实践与评价

在生殖中心(医院)中,将伦理原则的学习与技术规范的掌握相结合,将伦理学评价与员工的奖惩机制相结合,将伦理学研究与管理骨干的培养相结合,将伦理原则的贯彻与工作总结相结合;发挥医学伦理委员会监督的权威作用,重视群众监督手段的督促作用,借助国家行政督导机构和行业法规的震慑作用,是ART增强道德约束能力的有效机制.     

Disagreement and Dispute

In this paper, I will trace a distinction between two different ways of thinking about doxastic conflicts. The first way emphasises what is going on at the level of semantics, when two subjects disagree by uttering certain sentences or accepting certain contents. The second way emphasises some aspects that are epistemic in kind, which concern what subjects are rationally required to do whenever they disagree with someone. The semantics-oriented and epistemically-oriented notions will serve for the purpose of assessing some aspects of the debate that revolves around the notions of disagreement on matters of inclination. These aspects include: (i) the idea that disagreements in areas of inclination are somehow defective (Egan 2010); (ii) the idea that Relativism makes disagreement epistemically insignificant (Carter 2013); (iii) the idea that there can be faultless disagreements in which faultlessness is epistemic in kind (Schafer 2011).     

Reflection and Disagreement

How should you take into account the opinions of an advisor? When you completely defer to the advisor's judgment (the manner in which she responds to her evidence), then you should treat the advisor as a guru. Roughly, that means you should believe what you expect she would believe, if supplied with your extra evidence. When the advisor is your own future self, the resulting principle amounts to a version of the Reflection Principle—a version amended to handle cases of information loss. When you count an advisor as an epistemic peer, you should give her conclusions the same weight as your own. Denying that view—call it the “equal weight view”—leads to absurdity: the absurdity that you could reasonably come to believe yourself to be an epistemic superior to an advisor simply by noting cases of disagreement with her, and taking it that she made most of the mistakes. Accepting the view seems to lead to another absurdity: that one should suspend judgment about everything that one's smart and well‐informed friends disagree on, which means suspending judgment about almost everything interesting. But despite appearances, the equal weight view does not have this absurd consequence. Furthermore, the view can be generalized to handle cases involving not just epistemic peers, but also epistemic superiors and inferiors.     

Virtue and Disagreement

One of the most prominent strands in contemporary work on the virtues consists in the attempt to develop a distinctive—and compelling—account of practical reason on the basis of Aristotle’s ethics. In response to this project, several eminent critics have argued that the Aristotelian account encourages a dismissive attitude toward moral disagreement. Given the importance of developing a mature response to disagreement, the criticism is devastating if true. I examine this line of criticism closely, first elucidating the features of the Aristotelian account that motivate it, and then identifying two further features of the account that the criticism overlooks. These further features show the criticism to be entirely unwarranted. Once these features are acknowledged, a more promising line of criticism suggests itself—namely, that the Aristotelian account does too little to help us to resolve disputes—but that line of objection will have to be carried out on quite different grounds.