On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar's 'Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine'.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • Author(s): Symons, Xavier
  • Source:
    Journal of Medical Ethics. Nov2015, Vol. 41 Issue 11, p870-872. 3p.
  • Document Type:
    journal article
  • Additional Information
    • Subject Terms:
    • Author-Supplied Keywords:
      Abortion
      Moral Psychology
      Philosophical Ethics
      Political Philosophy
      Religious Ethics
    • Abstract:
      Nigel Biggar (2015) argues that religion deserves a place in secular medicine. Biggar suggests we abandon the standard rationalistic conception of the secular realm and see it rather as "a forum for the negotiation of rival reasonings". Religious reasoning is one among a number of ways of thinking that must vie for acceptance. Medical ethics, says Biggar, is characterised by "spiritual and moral mixture and ambiguity". We acknowledge this uncertainty by recognising rival viewpoints and agreeing to provisional compromises.In this response, I object to Biggar's characterisation of medical ethics as "morally ambiguous" and "provisional". I argue that Biggar has failed to provide adequate support for his conception of ethics as a "forum for negotiation and compromise". I criticise Biggar's attempt to 'pluralise' rationality, and assert that if religion is to play a role in secular medicine, it must be ready to defend itself against a universal standard of reason. In the second section of my response, I argue that 'theistic natural law' gives us the resources to defend using reason alone ostensibly faith-based positions in healthcare ethics. In doing so, we retain a univocal conception of rationality, while at the same time leaving space for 'theism' in healthcare ethics. [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:
      2402
    • ISSN:
      0306-6800
    • Accession Number:
      10.1136/medethics-2015-102805
    • Accession Number:
      110696176
  • Citations
    • ABNT:
      SYMONS, X. On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine”. Journal of Medical Ethics, [s. l.], v. 41, n. 11, p. 870–872, 2015. DOI 10.1136/medethics-2015-102805. Disponível em: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=hch&AN=110696176. Acesso em: 24 nov. 2020.
    • AMA:
      Symons X. On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine.” Journal of Medical Ethics. 2015;41(11):870-872. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102805
    • APA:
      Symons, X. (2015). On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine.” Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(11), 870–872. https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2015-102805
    • Chicago/Turabian: Author-Date:
      Symons, Xavier. 2015. “On the Univocity of Rationality: A Response to Nigel Biggar’s ‘Why Religion Deserves a Place in Secular Medicine.’” Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (11): 870–72. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102805.
    • Harvard:
      Symons, X. (2015) ‘On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine”’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 41(11), pp. 870–872. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2015-102805.
    • Harvard: Australian:
      Symons, X 2015, ‘On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine”’, Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 870–872, viewed 24 November 2020, .
    • MLA:
      Symons, Xavier. “On the Univocity of Rationality: A Response to Nigel Biggar’s ‘Why Religion Deserves a Place in Secular Medicine.’” Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 41, no. 11, Nov. 2015, pp. 870–872. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102805.
    • Chicago/Turabian: Humanities:
      Symons, Xavier. “On the Univocity of Rationality: A Response to Nigel Biggar’s ‘Why Religion Deserves a Place in Secular Medicine.’” Journal of Medical Ethics 41, no. 11 (November 2015): 870–72. doi:10.1136/medethics-2015-102805.
    • Vancouver/ICMJE:
      Symons X. On the univocity of rationality: a response to Nigel Biggar’s “Why religion deserves a place in secular medicine.” Journal of Medical Ethics [Internet]. 2015 Nov [cited 2020 Nov 24];41(11):870–2. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=hch&AN=110696176