RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재후보

    생명윤리학의 방법론 小考 = A Study on the Methods of Bioethics

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A82404693

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Nowadays there are so many approaches to bioethics including traditional deontology and utilitarianism, modern principlism and casuistry as well as virtue bioethics, care bioethics, narrative bioethics, feminist bioethics, communitarian bioethics, pragmatism bioethics, phenomenological bioethics etc. Although the methods of bioethics would never resolve every legal problem resulting from bio-science and bio-technologies, they could provide methodological basis for finding a way to resolve the problems. The methods for bioethics are not going to differ from those for ethics or moral philosophy in general. Like another applied ethics, main ethical theories of bioethics are not different from those of ethics in general. Above all, deontological theories and utilitarian theories are intermingles with each other in bioethics. The structure & process of resolution of bioethical problems is also analogous to that of another applied ethics or practical ethics. The resolution mechanism of bioethical problems will not work by simple case study without appeal to ethical theories. But mere application of ethical theories to particular cases can not resolve bioethical problems properly. In these respects, every method in bioethics has it's strengths and weaknesses. Futhermore some approaches are overlapped, converged and complementary to each other. Nearly all bioethicists reject the extreme approaches in favor of more moderate views that concede much to the other camp. The methodological debate has now moved to a more mature and reflective stage, in which confrontation has begun to be superseded by accommondation and reconciliation.
    번역하기

    Nowadays there are so many approaches to bioethics including traditional deontology and utilitarianism, modern principlism and casuistry as well as virtue bioethics, care bioethics, narrative bioethics, feminist bioethics, communitarian bioethics, pra...

    Nowadays there are so many approaches to bioethics including traditional deontology and utilitarianism, modern principlism and casuistry as well as virtue bioethics, care bioethics, narrative bioethics, feminist bioethics, communitarian bioethics, pragmatism bioethics, phenomenological bioethics etc. Although the methods of bioethics would never resolve every legal problem resulting from bio-science and bio-technologies, they could provide methodological basis for finding a way to resolve the problems. The methods for bioethics are not going to differ from those for ethics or moral philosophy in general. Like another applied ethics, main ethical theories of bioethics are not different from those of ethics in general. Above all, deontological theories and utilitarian theories are intermingles with each other in bioethics. The structure & process of resolution of bioethical problems is also analogous to that of another applied ethics or practical ethics. The resolution mechanism of bioethical problems will not work by simple case study without appeal to ethical theories. But mere application of ethical theories to particular cases can not resolve bioethical problems properly. In these respects, every method in bioethics has it's strengths and weaknesses. Futhermore some approaches are overlapped, converged and complementary to each other. Nearly all bioethicists reject the extreme approaches in favor of more moderate views that concede much to the other camp. The methodological debate has now moved to a more mature and reflective stage, in which confrontation has begun to be superseded by accommondation and reconciliation.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 의무론 vs. 공리주의
    • Ⅲ. 원리중심주의 vs. 사례중심주의
    • Ⅳ. 대안적 접근방법들
    • Ⅴ. 맺음말
    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 의무론 vs. 공리주의
    • Ⅲ. 원리중심주의 vs. 사례중심주의
    • Ⅳ. 대안적 접근방법들
    • Ⅴ. 맺음말
    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 Kant, I., "윤리형이상학 정초" 아카넷 2005

    2 이상목, "생명윤리학의 방법론" 14 : 2001

    3 권복규, "생명윤리와 법" 이화여대 출판부 2005

    4 최경석, "생명윤리에서의 넓은 반성적 평형과 판단력" 한국법철학회 11 (11): 65-84, 2008

    5 박은정, "생명공학시대의 법과 윤리" 이화여대 출판부 2000

    6 Daniels, N., "“Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Practice”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    7 Beauchamp, T., "“The Role of Principles in Practical Ethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" U. of Toronto P. 1996

    8 Winkler, E., "“Moral Philosophy and Bioethics: Contextualism versus the Paradigm Theory Bioethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    9 Hare, R.M., "“Methods of Bioethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    10 Childress, J., "“Methods in Bioethics”, The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics" OUP 2007

    1 Kant, I., "윤리형이상학 정초" 아카넷 2005

    2 이상목, "생명윤리학의 방법론" 14 : 2001

    3 권복규, "생명윤리와 법" 이화여대 출판부 2005

    4 최경석, "생명윤리에서의 넓은 반성적 평형과 판단력" 한국법철학회 11 (11): 65-84, 2008

    5 박은정, "생명공학시대의 법과 윤리" 이화여대 출판부 2000

    6 Daniels, N., "“Wide Reflective Equilibrium in Practice”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    7 Beauchamp, T., "“The Role of Principles in Practical Ethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" U. of Toronto P. 1996

    8 Winkler, E., "“Moral Philosophy and Bioethics: Contextualism versus the Paradigm Theory Bioethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    9 Hare, R.M., "“Methods of Bioethics”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    10 Childress, J., "“Methods in Bioethics”, The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics" OUP 2007

    11 Nelson, H., "“Four Narrative Approaches to Bioethics”, Handbook of Bioethics" Kluwer 2004

    12 Rachels, J., "“Ethical theory and bioethics”, A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    13 Walker, R., "“Bioethics”, Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2.ed, Vol. 1" Macmillan 2006

    14 Shanner, L., "“Bioethics through the Back Door: Phenomenology, Narratives, and Insight into Infertility”, Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    15 Boyle, J., "“An absolute rule approach”, A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    16 Oakley, J., "“A virtue ethics approach”, A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    17 Arras, J., "“A Case Approach”, A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    18 Manning, R., "“A Care Approach”, A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    19 Smart, J.J.C., "Utilitarianism, “Utilitarianism[Addendum]”, Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2. ed" Thomson Gale 2006

    20 Ross, W.D., "The Right and The Good" OUP 1930

    21 Steinbock, B., "The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics" OUP 2007

    22 Jonsen, A., "The History of Bioethics as a Discipline”, Handbook of Bioethics" Kluwer 2004

    23 Jonsen, A., "The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning" University of California Press 1988

    24 Beauchamp, T., "Principles of Biomedical Ethics" OUP 1979

    25 Sumner, L., "Philosophical Perspectives on Bioethics" University of Toronto Press 1996

    26 Fletcher, J., "Morals and Medicine" Princeton UP 1954

    27 Herring, J., "Medical Law and Ethics" OUP 2006

    28 Pattinson, S., "Medical Law and Ethics" Sweet&Maxwell 2006

    29 Jackson, E., "Medical Law" OUP 2006

    30 Khushf, G., "Handbook of Bioethics" Kluwer 2004

    31 Engelhardt, H.T., "Foundations of Bioethics" OUP 1986

    32 Frankena, W., "Ethics 2nd ed" Prentice-Hall 1973

    33 Düwell, M., "Bioethik" Metzler 2008

    34 Gert, B., "Bioethics: A Return to Fundamentals" OUP 1997

    35 Jecker, N., "Bioethics. An Introduction to the History, Methods, and Practice" Jones and Barlett 2007

    36 Dolgin, J., "Bioethics and the Law, 2.ed" Aspen 2009

    37 Paul, E., "Bioethics" Cambridge UP 2002

    38 Bentham, J., "An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation"

    39 MacIntyre, A., "After Virtue" Duckworth 1981

    40 Veatch, R., "A Theory of Medical Ethics" Basic Books 1981

    41 Rawls, J., "A Theory of Justice" Harvard UP 1971

    42 Clouser, K., "A Critique of Principlism" 15 : 1990

    43 Kuhse, H., "A Companion to Bioethics" Blackwell 1998

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2028 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2022-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2016-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
    2015-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
    2014-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
    2013-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2012-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (기타) KCI등재후보
    2011-02-15 학회명변경 한글명 : 법학연구소 -> 법학연구원 KCI등재후보
    2011-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2010-01-01 등재 신청제한 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2009-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2008-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2006-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.67 0.67 0.55
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.52 0.49 0.682 0.2
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼