What is bioethics?
Is it a legitimate “science,” an academic field with it’s own proper subject matter and method, and therefore with its own proper “experts”? Is it the same as “ethics per se,” or as “medical ethics per se”? Or is it something else? A. Does Bioethics Have a Proper Subject Matter? In observing even the little presented above, the answer is obviously “no”; bioethics does not have a proper subject matter. From the very beginning, as the historical details and documents have demonstrated, bioethics is a very recent sub-field of normative philosophical ethics which was created by the National Commission in 1978 in its Belmont Report — by mandate of the U.S. Congress. But it’s normative “theory” has been proven to be theoretically and practically defunct — even by many of the Founders of the field themselves, as well as by others inside and outside the field. Its “ethical principles” are theoretically indefensible, and practically impossible to logically and coherently apply. It never did a
Bioethics is a relatively new field, existing in nascent form since Antiquity but only emerging as an academic discipline in the 1960s. Bioethics concerns itself with ethical questions brought about by advances in biology and medicine. For instance, is assisted suicide just? Bioethics can also be described as focusing on ethical questions brought up by connections between biotechnology, medicine, life sciences, politics, philosophy, law, and theology. The field is often characterized by conflicts between those who see Christian philosophers, such as the Pope, to be the prime authority on questions of bioethics, and progressives like Peter Singer, who approach the field from a utilitarian rather than Biblical perspective. The first centers devoted to studies of bioethics were formed in the early 1970s. These include the Hastings Center (originally The Institute of Society, Ethics and the Life Sciences), which was founded in 1970 by psychiatrist Willard Gaylin and philosopher Daniel Call
Bioethics is an activity; it is a shared, reflective examination of ethical issues in health care, health science, and health policy. These fields have always had ethical standards, of course, handed down within each profession, and often without question. About forty years ago, however, it became obvious that we needed a more public, and more critical, discussion of these standards. Bioethics is that discussion. It takes place in the media, in the academy, in classrooms, and in labs, offices, and hospital wards. It involves not just doctors, but patients, not just scientists and politicians but the general public. Traditional ethical standards have been articulated, reflected on, challenged, and sometimes revised; standards for new issues have been created – and then challenged and revised. The conversation is often sparked by new developments, like the possibility of cloning. But bioethics also raises new questions about old issues, like the use of placebos and the treatment of pain.
Bioethics is the process of the matters which occur biologically. Biethics is the compound word with “bios” which represent life or something concerning life with “ethikos” which represent ethics or mores. Both words are traced from Greece. Biethical studyies have developed significantly in the United States. Bioethics purports to deal with the ethical and value issues that have been brought about by the rapid developments of science, technology, and biomedicine during the past fifteen years. Bioethical issues are a serious concern for all of us living in an era of “Life-Manipulation”. This is the reason why the new “supra-interdisciplinary” study of “Bioethics” deals with issues relating to all integrated aspects of life’s beginning, ending and quality, compared to the too narrow segmentation and ramification trends of traditional academic disciplines dealing with human and life issues separately. “Bioethics” is a result of the various human rights movements responding to the de-human
Is it a legitimate “science”, an academic field with it’s own proper subject matter and method, and therefore with its own proper “experts”? Is it the same as “ethics per se”, or as “medical ethics per se”? Or is it something else? A. Does Bioethics Have a Proper Subject Matter? In observing even the little presented above, the answer is obviously “no”; bioethics does not have a proper subject matter. From the very beginning, as the historical details and documents have demonstrated, bioethics is a very recent sub-field of normative philosophical ethics which was created by the National Commission in 1978 in its Belmont Report — by mandate of the U.S. Congress. But this normative ethical “theory” has been proven to be theoretically and practically defunct — even by many of the Founders of the field themselves, as well as by others inside and outside the field. Its “ethical principles” are theoretically indefensible, and practically impossible to logically and coherently apply. It nev
