论传媒伦理的界定

要科学地界定传媒伦理,首先,不能偏离伦理“致至善”的本性;其次,须从元伦理学、规范伦理学及应用伦理学三个层面深入考察传媒伦理的理论进路。本文认为,传媒伦理首先是对人们媒介行为中善恶选择的系统性探究,它系统地研究道德善的媒体当如何履职、媒体是否符合它的应当以及媒介从业人员在其媒介行为中对善与恶,正当与不正当的认识与抉择等问题;其次,与人们实际生活相关的是,传媒伦理也试图界定那些构成价值与生活规范的,被作为个体、群体或文化共同体的人们所共同认可的原则性的内容。     

A call for a statement of expectations for the global information infrastructure

This paper considers the relationship between ethics, technology and law, and the roles and limitations each has in this relationship. It argues that ethics has the key role in establishing a resilient, comprehensive and sensitive information infrastructure. It puts forward a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for the electronic community.

相似文献   

Caring: A Pluralist Account

In this paper, I argue that care ethics should be understood as a form of value pluralism. Writers on the ethics of care tend not explicitly to address issues in the theory of value, although much of what has been written about care ethics may be taken to suggest that it endorses some form of value monism. I argue against this conception of care ethics by showing that the practical reality of caregiving is more accurately represented by a pluralist account of value. Practices of care are plausibly guided by a number of distinct and potentially conflicting values. These include quality of life, autonomy, dignity, personal development, and the value of nurturant relationships. Whilst caring takes each of these values to be important in its own right, they are not always jointly realisable, and carers are sometimes forced to promote one such value at the expense of another. The possibility of conflict between values is, of course, precisely what a pluralist conception of value tells us to expect. In this respect, then, value pluralism more faithfully reflects the reality of caregiving than does value monism, and care ethicists ought for this reason to endorse it.     

What’s Human Rights Got to Do with It? On the Proposed Changes to SSHRC Ethics Research Policy

What’s human rights got to do with it? That is, what’s human rights got to do with the June 2004 report of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Ethics Special Working Committee to the Inter-Agency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics. The disturbing answer is “not enough.” Certain key recommendations of the working committee, it is suggested, would unacceptably weaken the researcher’s legal and moral accountability to research participants. Those particular recommendations rely on misguided references to academic freedom and the nature of the non-medical research context. In fact, universal human rights, and the legal instruments in which they are embodied ought to inform the research endeavor at every stage; from problem selection to analysis and conclusions. This will lead us closer to shared truths rather than simply to the academic elite’s vision of truth. Without sufficient regard for the human rights of research participants academic freedom itself is not possible.     

The CIOMS view on the use of placebo in clinical trials

Based on worldwide consultations with experts in science and ethics the revised CIOMS 2002 International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects provide guidance on when the use of placebo as a comparator in clinical research is ethically acceptable. The article reviews the main points of the CIOMS Guidelines and commentaries including the use of placebo in situations where the best current method is available and the relation of placebo to established effective intervention. It discusses the use of placebo in externally sponsored research in low-resource countries and requirements for informed consent related to placebo studies. An earlier version of this paper was presented at an international conference, “Placebo: Its Action and Place in Health Research Today,” held in Warsaw, Poland on 12–13 April, 2003.     

经济正义:当代伦理学面临的重大课题

正义是一个历史范畴。人类对正义的追求经历了一个由个人正义到社会正义、由政治正义到经济正义的过程。随着经济关系成为支配社会发展的主要力量,经济发展的单向度价值取向的危害日益严重,社会不公正现象在经济领域中日益凸现,经济正义已成为当代社会正义理论中最重要、最具有社会意义的内容和形式。     

Patient and Family Descriptions of Ethical Concerns

Abstract

Ethically challenging situations routinely arise in the course of illness and healthcare. However, very few studies have surveyed patients and family members about their experiences with ethically challenging situations. To address this gap in the literature, we surveyed patients and family members at three hospitals. We conducted a content analysis of their responses to open-ended questions about their most memorable experience with an ethical concern for them or their family member. Participants (N?=?196) described 219 unique ethical experiences that spanned many of the prevailing themes of bioethics, including the patient-physician relationship, end-of-life care, decision-making capacity, healthcare costs, and genetic testing. Participants focused on relational issues in the course of experiencing illness and receiving medical care and concerns regarding the patient-physician encounters. Many concerns arose outside of a healthcare setting. These data indicate areas for improvement for healthcare providers but some concerns may be better addressed outside of the traditional healthcare setting.     

Expiation,Substitution and Surrender: Levinasian Implications for Psychotherapy

This essay will build on Emmanuel Levinas’s rejection of ontology as foundational and draw out the implications for psychotherapy. We will explore Levinas’s concept of substitution (in both his more Jewish writings and his philosophical treatises) and consider its meaning in relationship to the role of a psychotherapist. Levinas understands the Other as a calling for substitution of the self and of a taking on of responsibility. We explore the notion of surrender in the work of the psychoanalyst Emmanuel Ghent and argue that his position is ultimately lacking in ethical injunction; requiring nothing of the self in relationship to the Other. It remains within the confines of the conventional, self-reflexive models that Levinas critiques. Following Levinas, we suggest that the therapist bear the burden of ethical responsibility by being exposed to the client’s ethical call and by responding out of a kenotic self-emptying.