Kant, Curves and Medical Learning Practice: A Reply to Le Morvan and Stock
Journal of Medical Ethics 2007 February; 33(2): 119-122
In a recent paper published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, Le Morvan and Stock claim that the kantian ideal of treating people always as ends in themselves and never merely as a means is in direct and insurmountable conflict with the current medical practice of allowing practitioners at the bottom of their "learning curve" to "practise their skills" on patients. In this response, I take up the challenge they issue is and try to reconcile this conflict. The kantian ideal offered in the paper is an incomplete characterisation of Kant's moral philosophy, and the formula of humanity is considered in isolation without taking into account other salient kantian principles. I also suggest that their argument based on "necessary for the patient" assumes too narrow a reading of "necessary". This reply is intended as an extension to, rather than a criticism of, their work.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Le Morvan, Pierre; Stock, B. (2005-09)A hitherto unexamined problem for the "Kantian ideal" that one should always treat patients as ends in themselves, and never only as a means to other ends, is explored in this paper. The problem consists of a prima facie ...
Brecher, B. (2006-09)The "Kantian ideal" is often misunderstood as invoking individual autonomy rather than rational self legislation. Le Morvan and Stock's otherwise insightful discussion of "Medical learning curves and the Kantian ideal"--for ...
Doyle, D J (2010-01)