Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Nigel Biggar has argued that religion ought to be given a seat at the negotiating table of medical ethics. I respond in broadly utilitarian terms, arguing that the flawed empirical basis, lack of rationality and non-universality inherent in religion disqualify it from ethical discourse. I conclude that while it would be unacceptable to attempt to debar religious individuals from the negotiating table, an exclusively secular approach is required for ethical decision making in medicine.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)867-869
    Number of pages3
    JournalJournal of Medical Ethics
    Volume41
    Issue number11
    Early online date19 Jun 2015
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 22 Oct 2015

    Fingerprint

    Religion and Medicine
    Ethical Theory
    Negotiating
    Religion
    medicine
    Medical Ethics
    medical ethics
    rationality
    Decision Making
    Medicine
    decision making
    discourse
    lack
    Utilitarianism

    Cite this

    @article{d9f3627ec5fe4f67ba401f9b865cd685,
    title = "Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar",
    abstract = "Nigel Biggar has argued that religion ought to be given a seat at the negotiating table of medical ethics. I respond in broadly utilitarian terms, arguing that the flawed empirical basis, lack of rationality and non-universality inherent in religion disqualify it from ethical discourse. I conclude that while it would be unacceptable to attempt to debar religious individuals from the negotiating table, an exclusively secular approach is required for ethical decision making in medicine.",
    author = "Smith, {Kevin R.}",
    year = "2015",
    month = "10",
    day = "22",
    doi = "10.1136/medethics-2015-102786",
    language = "English",
    volume = "41",
    pages = "867--869",
    journal = "Journal of Medical Ethics",
    issn = "0306-6800",
    publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
    number = "11",

    }

    Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism : a response to Biggar. / Smith, Kevin R.

    In: Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 41, No. 11, 22.10.2015, p. 867-869.

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism

    T2 - a response to Biggar

    AU - Smith, Kevin R.

    PY - 2015/10/22

    Y1 - 2015/10/22

    N2 - Nigel Biggar has argued that religion ought to be given a seat at the negotiating table of medical ethics. I respond in broadly utilitarian terms, arguing that the flawed empirical basis, lack of rationality and non-universality inherent in religion disqualify it from ethical discourse. I conclude that while it would be unacceptable to attempt to debar religious individuals from the negotiating table, an exclusively secular approach is required for ethical decision making in medicine.

    AB - Nigel Biggar has argued that religion ought to be given a seat at the negotiating table of medical ethics. I respond in broadly utilitarian terms, arguing that the flawed empirical basis, lack of rationality and non-universality inherent in religion disqualify it from ethical discourse. I conclude that while it would be unacceptable to attempt to debar religious individuals from the negotiating table, an exclusively secular approach is required for ethical decision making in medicine.

    U2 - 10.1136/medethics-2015-102786

    DO - 10.1136/medethics-2015-102786

    M3 - Comment/debate

    VL - 41

    SP - 867

    EP - 869

    JO - Journal of Medical Ethics

    JF - Journal of Medical Ethics

    SN - 0306-6800

    IS - 11

    ER -