Moral Strangers, Proceduralism, and Moral Consensus

1Citations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This essay is meant to honor H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. and acknowledge the influence of his work in my wrestling with the philosophical, moral, and political predicament of Western culture. I recognize my debt to Tris in my intellectual development and in my scholarship, particularly in framing a proceduralist approach to ethics. That said, I also outline some points of divergence. While I am sympathetic with his diagnosis of the predicament of Western culture and its implications for bioethics, I raise some critical points concerning the notion of moral strangers and his approach to procedural ethics. First, I outline Tris’ diagnosis of the nature of secular morality in Western culture, which by default is procedural, and examine the concept of moral strangers. Second, I critically assess Tris’ proceduralism and argue that his framework does not take into account the possibility of overlapping frameworks between various moral communities. Hence, third, I argue for a weak form of proceduralism, which allows the establishment of moral discourse through a web of partial understandings of moral issues, in spite of moral disagreements. I conclude my essay by recognizing the significance of Tris’ criticism of mainstream bioethics and underscore the importance of his legacy for the future of the field.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jotterand, F. (2015). Moral Strangers, Proceduralism, and Moral Consensus. In Philosophy and Medicine (Vol. 125, pp. 201–213). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18965-9_12

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free