Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Arresting but misleading phrases.

J Harris

    Journal of Medical Ethics
    |September 1, 1984
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Ignorance, information and autonomy.

    Theoretical medicine and bioethics·2002
    Same author

    Crete: does farming explain urban and rural differences in atopy?

    Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology·2001
    Same author

    One principle and three fallacies of disability studies.

    Journal of medical ethics·2001
    Same author

    RTOG 96-10: reirradiation with concurrent hydroxyurea and 5-fluorouracil in patients with squamous cell cancer of the head and neck.

    International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics·2001
    Same author

    Electrogastrographic norms in children: toward the development of standard methods, reproducible results, and reliable normative data.

    Journal of pediatric gastroenterology and nutrition·2001
    Same author

    Use of molecular probes to assess geographic distribution of Pfiesteria species.

    Environmental health perspectives·2001
    Same journal

    Suspension or prioritisation? Exploring the ethics of age-based rationing in adult ADHD services.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    Same journal

    Ethics of not knowing who we are talking to in qualitative research.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    Same journal

    Suicide is not a public health issue and perhaps very few things should be.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    Same journal

    Not all personal utilities are equal: a two-tier normative framework for genomic health technology assessment.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    Same journal

    Emergent ethics of xenotransplantation: findings from a survey on public attitudes toward animal to human organ transplantation in the UK.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    Same journal

    Is sport in the 'public interest'? Towards a legal and ethical framework for justifying sport-related harm.

    Journal of medical ethics·2026
    See all related articles

    This paper clarifies utilitarianism in medical ethics, arguing against broad labels. It emphasizes evaluating arguments for and against ethical positions rather than relying on simplistic categorizations.

    Area of Science:

    • Medical Ethics
    • Moral Philosophy

    Background:

    • Common misconceptions surround utilitarian approaches in medical ethics.
    • Broad characterizations of ethical stances (e.g., utilitarian, Hippocratic) can be misleading.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To address and correct prevalent misunderstandings of utilitarianism in medical ethics.
    • To advocate for a focus on the merits of ethical arguments over labels.

    Main Methods:

    • Conceptual analysis of utilitarianism in medical ethics.
    • Critique of broad, unargued ethical categorizations.

    Main Results:

    • Misconceptions about utilitarianism's implications in medical ethics are identified.
    • The inadequacy of simplistic labels for ethical positions is demonstrated.
    Keywords:
    Analytical ApproachBioethics and Professional EthicsDeath and EuthanasiaPhilosophical Approach

    Related Experiment Videos

    Conclusions:

    • Ethical decision-making should prioritize robust argumentation over adherence to labels.
    • A nuanced evaluation of supporting and opposing arguments is crucial in medical ethics.