A Substantivist Construal of Discourse Ethics

Abstract

This paper presents a substantivist construal of discourse ethics, which claims that we should see our engagement in public deliberation as expressing and elaborating a substantive commitment to basic moral ideas of solidarity, equality, and freedom. This view is different from Habermas’s standard formalist defence of discourse ethics, which attempts to derive the principle of discursive moral justification from primarily non‐moral presuppositions of rational argumentation as such. After explicating the difference between the substantivist and the formalist construal, I defend the former by showing that it is not only intuitively compelling, but also particularly well equipped for addressing four important objections recently levelled against discourse ethics and its political applications (Rawls’s concern that it lacks substantive guidelines, Gunnarsson’s challenge that it has not been proven to be superior to alternative moral conceptions such as utilitarianism, Scanlon’s complaint that it lacks an account of moral motivation, and Galston’s and Young’s worries that it could lead to political practices of cultural imposition). I conclude by pointing out some consequences of the previous discussion for the future of Critical Theory.     

家庭成员间活体器官及组织捐赠的伦理问题

家庭成员间活体器官及组织捐赠是被绝大多数国家所允许的.虽然利益化减少了很多,但是目前发现其也存在许多的伦理问题.就家庭成员间活体器官及组织捐赠的伦理基础,以及就捐赠风险、种族差异、失衡之爱、操纵、拒绝、退出、潜在利益、特殊疾病等涉及的相关伦理问题进行综述,并就存在的相关问题的解决方法进行探讨.     

人乳头瘤病毒疫苗带来的伦理问题

人乳头瘤病毒疫苗的问世使宫颈癌的预防进入崭新的时代,自其问世以来便饱受伦理争议.通过分析目前全球医学文献中比较重视和争议的伦理问题,如Gardasil与Cervarix哪种更为有效,能否在发展中国家顺利推广,应当“强制接种”还是“自愿接种”,男性是否应常规接种等.基于伦理学的基本原则,提出正确的宣教是解决的经由之路.     

基因研究中的知情同意之惑

知情同意作为生命伦理的重要原则,在基因研究中同样占据重要的地位,由于基因研究中知情同意的异质性,在基因研究中面临着诸如如何理解其知情同意的异质性、群体知情同意、基因知情与基因隐私、利益冲突等问题.通过分析基因研究中知情同意的特殊性,综合国内外此领域的已有研究,运用理论联系实际的方法,得出结论认为,只有正确区分基因知情与基因隐私的权利主体,用伦理规范来解决利益冲突,在发展中不断完善知情同意,才能够取得科技与伦理的共赢.     

《管子》生态伦理思想及其当代启示

《管子》生态伦理思想具有丰富而深刻的内涵,“天人相分”与“天人合一”的天人观,“道为物要”与“德润万物”的伦理观,“人君天地”与“人与天调”的实践观。其深刻的精神理念对我们今天的生态文明建设具有重要的借鉴意义。这些启示我们应从强化生态意识、加强生态制度建设、实施行为生态化建设、坚持生态化修养建设等方面加强生态文明建设。     

Boundary Issues in Academia: Student Perceptions of Faculty—Student Boundary Crossings

Boundary crossings in academia are rarely addressed by university policy despite the risk of problematic or unethical faculty—student interactions. This study contributes to an understanding of undergraduate college student perceptions of appropriateness of faculty—student nonsexual interactions by investigating the influence of gender and ethnicity on student judgments of the appropriateness of numerous hypothetical interactions. Overall, students deemed the majority of interactions as inappropriate. Female students judged a number of interactions as more inappropriate than did male students, and with a few exceptions, Mexican American and Anglo American students were similar in their ratings of the appropriateness of faculty—student interactions. These findings suggest that universities need to be proactive in establishing guidelines concerning faculty-student boundary crossings.     

Social and Behavioral Researchers' Experiences With Their IRBs

This article examines the responsibilities of researchers who conduct exploratory research to provide a service to vulnerable respondents. The term “service” is used to denote the provision of a tangible benefit in relation to the research question that is apart from the altruistic research benefits. This article explores what this “service” could look like, who might be responsible for providing it, and the challenges associated with such a service. The article argues that not providing a tangible benefit to vulnerable research participants is inconsistent with the principle of social justice that undergirds much of the rationale for conducting health disparities research.     

Deception in Experiments: Revisiting the Arguments in Its Defense

In psychology, deception is commonly used to increase experimental control. Yet, its use has provoked concerns that it raises participants' suspicions, prompts second-guessing of experimenters' true intentions, and ultimately distorts behavior and endangers the control it is meant to achieve. Over time, these concerns regarding the methodological costs of the use of deception have been subjected to empirical analysis. We review the evidence stemming from these studies.     

Measures of Mentoring,Department Climate,and Graduate Student Preparedness in the Responsible Conduct of Psychological Research

Drawing upon two independent national samples of 201 and 241 psychology graduate students, this article describes the development and psychometric evaluation of 4 Web-based student self-report scales tapping student socialization in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) with human participants. The Mentoring the Responsible Conduct of Research Scale (MRCR) is composed of 2 subscales assessing RCR instruction and modeling by research mentors. The 2 subscales of the RCR Department Climate Scale (RCR-DC) assess RCR department policies and faculty and student RCR practices. The RCR Preparedness scale (RCR-P) and the RCR Field Integrity scale (RCR-FI) measure respectively students' confidence in their ability to conduct research responsibly and their belief in the RCR integrity of psychology as a discipline. Factor analysis, coefficient alphas, correlations, and multiple regression analyses demonstrated each of the scales had good internal consistency and concurrent and construct validity.