What is the habermasian perspective in bioethics?

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 188-199

  Gunson, Darryl ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST OF SCOTLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOETHICS; ETHICAL THEORY; ETHICS; FREEDOM; GENETIC ENHANCEMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN CHARACTERISTIC; INFORMED CONSENT; MORALITY; PERCEPTION; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; TRANSGENIC ORGANISM; VERBAL COMMUNICATION;

BIOETHICS; ETHICAL THEORY; FREEDOM; GENETIC ENHANCEMENT; HUMAN CHARACTERISTICS; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MORAL OBLIGATIONS; NARRATION; ORGANISMS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; SOCIAL PERCEPTION; SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY;

EID: 84857825713     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: 14692147     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0963180111000697     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Habermas J. The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2003.
2. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalisation of Society. Boston: Beacon Press; 1984.
3. Habermas J. The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Boston: Beacon Press, 1985.
4. Habermas J. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity; 1987.
5. Habermas J. Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Oxford: Polity; 1990.
6. See Mameli M. Reproductive cloning, genetic engineering and the autonomy of the child: The moral agent and the open future. Journal of Medical Ethics 2007;33(2):87-93.
7. See Häyry M. Rationality and the Genetic Challenge: Making People Better? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010
8. Harris J. Enhancing Evolution: The Ethical Case for Making Better People. Princeton, NJ, and Oxford: Princeton University Press; 2007, at 142.
9. Brand A. The Force of Reason. Sydney: Allen and Unwin; 1990.
10. Hegel GWF. Natural Law. Philadelphia: UPP; 1975, at 77.
11. Habermas J. Discourse ethics: Notes on a program of philosophical justification. In his Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1990:43-116.
12. For the view that Kant builds his substantive moral views into his conception of rationality see Walker R. Kant. London: Routledge, Kegan & Paul; 1978, at 158.
13. see Gunson D. Global bioethics, collective identities and the limits of rationality. Studies in Ethics, Law, and Technology 2010;4(1):1-37).
14. See, for example, Culler J. Communicative competence and normative force. New German Critique 1984;35:133-44.
15. Cf. Benhabib S. Critique, Norm and Utopia. New York: Columbia University Press; 1980, at 294-5.
16. See Outhwaite W. Habermas: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: Polity; 1994:44-57.
17. For a discussion of the idea of a reconstructive science see Habermas J. What is universal pragmatics? In: Communication and the Evolution of Society. London: Heinemann; 1979.
18. Cf. Habermas J. Reconstruction and interpretation in the social sciences. In his Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Oxford: Polity; 1990.
19. See Gunson D, Collins C. From the I to the We: Discourse ethics, identity and the pragmatics of partnership in the west of Scotland. Communication Theory 1997;7(4):278-300.
20. Forester J, ed. Critical Theory and Public Life. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1985.