Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15906935›Full record

ReviewMedicine, health care, and philosophy2005

The contribution of Kantian moral theory to contemporary medical ethics: a critical analysis.

Friedrich Heubel, Nikola Biller-Andorno

Abstract readBiographyHistorical ArticleReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Does organ selling violate human dignity?Monash bioethics review · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Reconsidering Kantian arguments against organ selling.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2016
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Ethical concerns in early 21(st) century organ transplantation.Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2011
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Immanuel Kant, his philosophy and medicine.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2008
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Friedrich HeubelPhilipps University, D-35037, Marburg, Germany. heubelfr@uni-marburg.de
Nikola Biller-Andorno

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Kantian deontology is one of three classic moral theories, among virtue ethics and consequentialism. Issues in medical ethics are frequently addressed within a Kantian paradigm, at least --although not exclusively--in European medical ethics. At the same time, critical voices have pointed to deficits of Kantian moral philosophy which must be examined and discussed. It is argued that taking concrete situations and complex relationships into account is of paramount importance in medical ethics. Encounters between medical or nursing staff and patients are rarely symmetrical relationships between autonomous and rational agents. Kantian ethics, the criticism reads, builds on the lofty ideal of such a relationship. In addition to the charge of an individualist and rationalist focus on autonomy, Kantian ethics has been accused of excluding those not actually in possession of these properties or of its rigorism. It is said to be focussed on laws and imperatives to an extent that it cannot appreciate the complex nuances of real conflicts. As a more detailed analysis will show, these charges are inadequate in at least some regards. This will be demonstrated by drawing on the Kantian notion of autonomy, the role of maxims and judgment and the conception of duties, as well as the role of emotions. Nevertheless the objections brought forward against Kantian moral theory can help determine, with greater precision, its strengths and shortcomings as an approach to current problems in medical ethics.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalMoral ObligationsPhilosophyEmotionsEthical AnalysisEthical TheoryGermanyHistory, 18th CenturyHistory, 19th CenturyHumansPersonal AutonomyBioethics and Professional EthicsPhilosophical Approach

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.