政府与个人的责任——中国当代医疗改革的责任伦理学剖析

卫生改革的重点必须放在政府部门;公共卫生,预防与初级医疗保健是人类生存的需要,带有鲜明的公益性和福利性。应由政府投资为主筹集资源,以国家投资为主体负担费用,这个层次的卫生服务产品,属非商品经济部分,并不以赢利为目的,不能引进市场经济,个人对健康负有重要责任,包括：选择医疗保健,决定花费数额,生活方式和卫生习惯的养成,主动接受健康教育,抵抗压力,支持国家与地区的卫生保健政策;个人对自身健康负责是一种道德责任,健商（health quotient)这一重要概念,具有伦理价值和普遍的医学人类学意义;个人对健康负责是一种社会风尚。     

论构成的主体性与意动的主体性

先验主体性与客体性尽管在概念上相互对峙,但作为人类经验与实践的出发点,它们在运作上却从一开始就是浑然一体的。构成主体性是让在时空中对象化了的客体呈现在主体面前并获得意义的意向结构,意动主体性却是让主体获得目的性并将目的在与客体的相互作用中对象化的意向结构。在构成主体性和意动主体性之间的互动中协辩理性的介入,是使规范伦理学有可能在交互主体性的平台上展开的先决条件。     

Why Not Interfere With Nature?

Advocates of an environmental ethic frequently claim that what makes an ethical theory truly and uniquely environmental is its commitment to the principle that environmental wholes such as species, ecosystems, and biotic communities are morally considerable. The prevailing view is that our primary duty towards these wholes is to respect their integrity, stability, and beauty, and that the best way to do this is to leave them alone, not interfere with them, and let nature follow its own course. But is that correct? Why should be refrain from interfering with nature? There are two ways an environmentalist might try to justify an exceptionaless, prima facie principle of noninterference. First, she might claim that there is a contingent but universal connection between human interference and ecosystemic harm. There is also an epistemic variant of this view. When faced with a decision concerning whether to interfere with an ecosystem, there will always be overwhelming reasons for thinking that interference will be harmful, regardless of the specific circumstances. Send, there might be some conceptual connection between interference and harm to ecosystems. For example, if the well-being of an ecosystem is identified with its wildness, and wildness is understood as the absence of human intervention or manipulation, then any human interference necessarily detracts from an ecosystem's wildness and thereby has a detrimental effect on its well-being. In this paper I examine these justifications in detail and argue that none can support an exceptionaless principle of noninterference.     

Christian counsellors' views on working with gay and lesbian clients: Integrating religious beliefs with counselling ethics

Thirty‐one counsellors who identified themselves as practising, committed Christians, returned completed questionnaires that investigated how they integrate their Christian beliefs with their professional ethical code when counselling gay and lesbian clients. It was found that although most respondents believed that they were able to accept gay and lesbian clients, a minority demonstrated incongruence in relation to members of this client group, and were judgmental about perceived gay/lesbian behavious. Counsellors who took a rational stance in their understanding of the Bible and Christianity expressed more open and accepting views. Counsellors with a literalist approach to the Bible appeared to be lacking in acceptance and were unaware that they may not be offering the core condition of respect to their gay or lesbian clients. These findings are discussed in terms of their implications for supervision, research and practice.     

Are University Professors Qualified to Teach Ethics?

In the light of recent talk in Canadian business schools about the importance of teaching courses in business ethics, the authors ask whether business professors have the qualifications required to teach business ethics. They point to various ethical dilemmas that arise in a collegial setting and argue that academics who teach business ethics have to first understand the complex ethical situations in which they find themselves if business ethics is to be taught in a meaningful way.     

儒家伦理思想与当代中国道德体系建设

儒家伦理思想作为中华民族道德传统的主干,一直深深地、普遍地影响着人们的思想观念和行为选择,对中华民族的道德追求、行为方式和人格塑造都产生了重大影响。儒家“仁爱”的道德原则及其道德规范体系,以及关于职业道德、家庭道德和社会公德的思想和要求,都是社会主义道德建设的宝贵资源。我们应当坚持批判继承其原则和方法,摒弃其消极因素,吸取、弘扬其积极因素,这对于当今中国道德体系的建设是十分重要的。     

“亚当·斯密问题”的逻辑张力

“亚当·斯密问题”是指斯密的《国富论》与《道德情操论》之间存在着对立或不一致的问题,最初由十九世纪中叶的德国历史学派所提出。此后,随着现实与理论的发展,出现了不同的看法。学者们普遍认为,斯密的两大著作之间、经济学与伦理学之间存在着对立或者不存在对立,而是相互一致的。这些看法都具有各自的积极合理的内容,但缺乏辩证的观点,而没有看到“斯密问题”自身的逻辑张力,也就是说,“斯密问题”所指涉的是现实的经济与伦理之间及作为其理论表现的经济学与伦理学之间的关系。“斯密问题”所含的这些关系呈现出了一个动态的、由肯定到否定再到否定之否定的辩证过程。     

关于克隆人试验与伦理学的三原则

由于克隆人试验的对象是人的活细胞,不是人的胚胎;并且由于人只能有限地决定自己的未来,根本无法决定自己的出生;同时由于基因诊断和修复有助于新生儿的健康,因而克隆人试验既不会伤害任何人的生命体,也不会侵犯任何可能出现的克隆人的自主权和平等权,进而不会违反伦理学的三原则。     

市场经济、道德权利与产权伦理

产权伦理是现代市场经济的一个根本性的精神基础,是建立有效的产权制度及其运行机制的重要条件;同时,它是人类道德体系的核心价值理念之一,是基于权利,义务与道德的内在逻辑构建起来的。产权伦理的研究具有重要的理论价值和现实意义,可以构成一门具有特殊的学科特质,研究方法和理论内容的伦理学学科。     

关于伦理道德与智慧

伦理道德与智慧的关系是一个有着重要的理论和现实意义的课题。伦理、道德与智慧都有联系,但本身都不是智慧。伦理智慧与道德智慧相通,但两者不是同一种意义上的智慧。伦理智慧与道德智慧具有多方面的社会价值,提倡伦理智慧和道德智慧有助于当代中国的社会改革和全面进步,为此需要对中国传统伦理思想和道德价值进行批判性的反思。