Show simple item record

dc.creatorTong, Rosemarieen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:30:33Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:30:33Zen
dc.date.created1991-08en
dc.date.issued1991-08en
dc.identifier10.1093/jmp/16.4.409en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medicine and Philosophy. 1991 Aug; 16(4): 409-426.en
dc.identifier.issn0360-5310en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=The+Epistemology+and+Ethics+of+Consensus:+Uses+and+Misuses+Of+"ethical"+Expertise&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy.++&volume=16&issue=4&pages=409-426&date=1991&au=Tong,+Rosemarieen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/16.4.409en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/736322en
dc.description.abstractIn this paper I examine the epistemology and ethics of consensus, focusing on the ways in which decision makers use/misuse ethical expertise. The major questions I raise and tentative answers I give are the following: First, are the "experts" really experts? My tentative answer is that they are bona fide experts who often represent specific interest groups. Second, is the experts' authority merely epistemological or is it also ethical? My tentative answer is that the experts' authority consists not only in their command over specific matters of fact and/or value, but also in their ability to achieve "consensus" about what is "true"/"false", or "right"/"wrong". Third, should the authority of expertise be limited? My tentative answer is that it should be limited in the area of facts but especially in the area of values. Persons who are ethics "experts" must be particularly careful to practice an ethics ofen
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/34182en
dc.subjectAdvisory Committeesen
dc.subjectBioethical Issuesen
dc.subjectBiomedical Technologiesen
dc.subjectClinical Ethicsen
dc.subjectClinical Ethics Committeesen
dc.subjectCommunicationen
dc.subjectConsensusen
dc.subjectConsultationen
dc.subjectDecision Makingen
dc.subjectEthical Analysisen
dc.subjectEthicistsen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectEthics Committeesen
dc.subjectEthics Consultationen
dc.subjectHealthen
dc.subjectHospitalsen
dc.subjectInterdisciplinary Communicationen
dc.subjectInterprofessional Relationsen
dc.subjectInvestigatorsen
dc.subjectPatient Careen
dc.subjectPhilosophyen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subjectResearch Ethicsen
dc.subjectResearch Ethics Committeesen
dc.subjectScienceen
dc.subjectSocial Interactionen
dc.subjectTechnical Expertiseen
dc.subjectTechnologyen
dc.subjectUncertaintyen
dc.subjectValuesen
dc.titleThe Epistemology and Ethics of Consensus: Uses and Misuses of "Ethical" Expertiseen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885