2020
DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2020.1832611
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

There’s No Harm in Talking: Re-Establishing the Relationship Between Theological and Secular Bioethics

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bioethics as a product of human civilization was formed under the pressure of widespread social change and the collapse of traditional institutions (Engelhardt, 2012). Attempts to translate theological claims and moral arguments into non-theological terms aim to facilitate interaction and demonstrate the universality of these theological claims beyond one's own tradition (Eberl, 2020;McCarthy et al, 2020). Broadly speaking, the bioethical debate is a social movement in response to legal dynamics in the biopolitical landscape, it also appears as a social agenda to change public policy (Engelhardt, 2012).…”
Section: Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Bioethics as a product of human civilization was formed under the pressure of widespread social change and the collapse of traditional institutions (Engelhardt, 2012). Attempts to translate theological claims and moral arguments into non-theological terms aim to facilitate interaction and demonstrate the universality of these theological claims beyond one's own tradition (Eberl, 2020;McCarthy et al, 2020). Broadly speaking, the bioethical debate is a social movement in response to legal dynamics in the biopolitical landscape, it also appears as a social agenda to change public policy (Engelhardt, 2012).…”
Section: Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(IE) Without a change in the religious anthropological conception of the working definition of human dignity, efforts to translate bioethics with religious morality into a secular context would be impossible (Żuradzki & Wiśniowska, 2020). Another crucial issue with McCarthy, Homan, and Rozier (2020) is the doctrine of forgiving sins and the paradox between autonomy and the common good (Colgrove, 2020;Geppert & Schonfeld, 2020). The idea of sin presupposes the existence of God and involves distorting one's relationship with the creator so it is incompatible with a nonreligious worldview (Li, 2020;Matisonn, 2020).…”
Section: Analysis and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Religion may form the heuristic context to discern values, but is not necessarily their sole epistemological source nor provides their sole justification. We need a détente between religion and reason, not an escalation of the battle (27).…”
Section: Why Using Theological Arguments In the Context Of Assisted Dying Is Problematicmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are some vigorous debates over the extent to which religion plays a role in modern healthcare. These debates includes concerns over clinicians providing religious and spiritual support (Sloan and Bagiella 2000), religious frameworks being used to inform bioethical rules and regulations (Murphy 2012;Schuklenk 2018;McCarthy, Homan and Rozier 2020), and religious values being used to support modifying or limiting conventional healthcare (Campbell 2018). Regardless of these important debates, religion and medicine both respond to the human condition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%