Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): Smith, Kevin R
  • Source:
    Journal of Medical Ethics. Nov2015, Vol. 41 Issue 11, p867-869. 3p.
  • Document Type:
    journal article
  • Additional Information
    • Subject Terms:
    • Author-Supplied Keywords:
      Abortion
      Infanticide
      Moral and Religious Aspects
      Philosophical Ethics
      Religious Ethics
    • 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Journal of Medical Ethics is the property of BMJ Publishing Group and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
    • Full Text Word Count:
      2273
    • ISSN:
      0306-6800
    • Accession Number:
      10.1136/medethics-2015-102786
    • Accession Number:
      110696174
  • Citations
    • ABNT:
      SMITH, K. R. Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar. Journal of Medical Ethics, [s. l.], v. 41, n. 11, p. 867–869, 2015. DOI 10.1136/medethics-2015-102786. Disponível em: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=hch&AN=110696174. Acesso em: 26 nov. 2020.
    • AMA:
      Smith KR. Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2015;41(11):867-869. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102786
    • APA:
      Smith, K. R. (2015). Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar. Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(11), 867–869. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2015-102786
    • Chicago/Turabian: Author-Date:
      Smith, Kevin R. 2015. “Religion, Secular Medicine and Utilitarianism: A Response to Biggar.” Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (11): 867–69. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102786.
    • Harvard:
      Smith, K. R. (2015) ‘Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(11), pp. 867–869. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102786.
    • Harvard: Australian:
      Smith, KR 2015, ‘Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar’, Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 867–869, viewed 26 November 2020, .
    • MLA:
      Smith, Kevin R. “Religion, Secular Medicine and Utilitarianism: A Response to Biggar.” Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 41, no. 11, Nov. 2015, pp. 867–869. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102786.
    • Chicago/Turabian: Humanities:
      Smith, Kevin R. “Religion, Secular Medicine and Utilitarianism: A Response to Biggar.” Journal of Medical Ethics 41, no. 11 (November 2015): 867–69. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102786.
    • Vancouver/ICMJE:
      Smith KR. Religion, secular medicine and utilitarianism: a response to Biggar. Journal of Medical Ethics [Internet]. 2015 Nov [cited 2020 Nov 26];41(11):867–9. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=hch&AN=110696174