Questioning Engelhardt's assumptions in Bioethics and Secular Humanism

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Moral Philosophy
• Secular Humanism

Background:

• Critiques Tristram Engelhardt's argument that content-full secular bioethics is impossible due to the concept of 'moral strangers'.
• Highlights the circularity in defining moral strangers as lacking shared background, thus precluding moral agreement.
• Questions the assumption of traditions as immutable, insulating structures hindering cross-boundary discourse.

Discussion:

• Examines the problematic assumption that religious and philosophical traditions inherently provide content-full moralities.
• Analyzes Engelhardt's foundationalist account of moral reasoning and knowledge as a core assumption.
• Proposes alternative pathways to moral knowledge beyond foundationalism.

Key Insights:

• Engelhardt's conclusion on the futility of secular bioethics is based on questionable assumptions about traditions and moral reasoning.
• The definition of 'moral strangers' creates a circular argument against the possibility of shared ethical discourse.
• Alternative models of moral knowledge can support a content-full secular bioethics.

Outlook:

• Re-evaluating assumptions about traditions and moral epistemology is crucial for advancing secular bioethics.
• Further research can explore non-foundationalist approaches to moral reasoning in bioethics.
• This work opens avenues for establishing common ground in moral discourse across diverse traditions.