My objective of this paper is to suggest and workout a more credible form of the Principle of Beneficence from the common essential elements of the three major ethical theories (Deontology, Utilitarianism and Virtue Ethics) that will try to overcome the over-demanding objection of Utilitarianism and the rigorism of Kant’s Deontology. After analyzing these three moral systems, I find that beneficence lies within the very essence of humanity. Human beings are superior to other creatures in the world due to rationality (...) and humanity. From the humanitarian ground, a common goodness lies within every human. Beneficence, as a moral principle, is derived from this inner humanity of every individual. Despite their initial differences, utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics recognize this fundamental humanitarian disposition of doing good for all as a part of being a morally better person. The principle of beneficence as I suggest, is different from its consequential utilitarian notion suggested by Mill. This version of beneficence is more credible as it does not impose excessive demands upon an individual to develop any maximum beneficial outcome following utilitarian calculation of beneficence over cost, and it also strives to overcome the rigorous duty-based theory of Kantian deontology by appealing to the fundamental virtue of humanity. Finally, the credibility of this form of beneficence comes from the underlying transcendental humanism which is the chief feature of Indian tradition. (shrink)

The aim of the paper is to reconsider Habermas’ discourse approach in terms of its usefulness in the realm of public healthcare where, on a microscale, intersubjective communicative situations arise between defined participants, i.e., patients and healthcare providers, patients’ family members, and further eligible contributors to patient-related decision making. A need for more “communicative interaction,” and explicative and practical discourse, is illustrated by two empirical examples of medical decision making which reveal both communicative and discursive deficits. To empower and enable (...) the patient as a rational and autonomous speaker and discourse participant, a Habermasian emancipatory argument and ‘the power of the better argument’ is recalled. The possibility of equal communicative and discursive rights in the light of real inequalities is discussed in the context of a ‘competence gap’ between participants. Further sections focus on the importance of informed consent on the side of the patient and the communicative competences as an important factor of healthcare system. (shrink)

In this article I examine whether Moral Foundations Theory can fulfil the promises that Haidt claims for the theory: that it will help in developing new approaches to moral education and to the moral conflicts that divide our diverse society. I argue that, first, the model that Haidt suggests for understanding the plurality of moralities—a shared foundation underlying diverse moralities—does not help to overcome conflicts. A better understanding of the nature and background of moral conflicts can lead to a more (...) respectful attitude towards people with conflicting views, but need not contribute to ending conflicts. Second, I show that pervasive moral conflicts should be dealt with on the level of politics. They require a morality of compromising. Third, I examine why this approach does not seem to work in the USA. (shrink)

Jurgen Habermas is a second-generation social philosopher of the Frankfurt school, the birthplace of critical theory. He suggests that modernity is a project of substituting rationality for religion. In his analysis, such a succession is the result of a process of social evolution, in which each developmental stage has its basic concepts and modes of understanding subjective, objective, and social worlds. For him, the salient feature of rationality consists of differentiation between various validity claims of truth, truthfulness, and sincerity which (...) are indistinguishable in religious language. The rationalization of religion, hence, progresses in terms of a differentiation between validity claims, a decentration of human understanding, the disenchantment of the world, and the linguistification of the sacred. Habermas proposes a universal pragmatics in which two modes of language use are separated: instrumental-strategic, and communicative. He thinks that the failure of the enlightenment movement to replace religion with reason stems from its preoccupation with instrumental reason and language use, dispensing with communicative rationality; and the remedy lies in communicative rationality. (shrink)

Kohlberg'in ahlak gelişim teorisi, uluslararası düzeyde kabul gören ve pek çok çalışmaya temel teşkil eden bir teoridir. Bununla birlikte teori, özellikle Batı'da, kendisine meydan okuyan ciddi eleştirilerle de karşı karşıya kalmıştır. Hatta bu eleştirilere karşı savunma eleştirileri yapılmış ve tüm eleştirilerdeki vurgulardan hareketle yeni bazı teoriler daha geliştirilmiştir. Ancak tüm bu gelişmeler Türkiye'deki literatüre henüz girememiştir. Nitekim ülkemizde Kohlberg'in teorisi üzerine yapılan çalışmalar, genellikle ahlak gelişim basamaklarıyla sınırlı kalmış, teorinin eleştiriye açık yönleri göz ardı edilmiştir. Oysa gerek teorinin daha iyi (...) anlaşılabilmesi gerekse bu teoriden hareketle alternatif ahlak teorilerinin geliştirilebilmesi için bu kapsamdaki belli başlı eleştiriler de bilinmelidir. Bu düşünceden yola çıkarak, makalede Kohlberg'in ahlak gelişim teorisine yöneltilen eleştirilerden hareketle, teorinin sorunlu yönlerini ortaya koymak amaçlanmıştır. Bu doğrultuda, özellikle Kohlberg ve çağdaşlarının eserleri taranarak doküman incelemesi yöntemine başvurulmuştur. Araştırma sonunda, Kohlberg'in teorisinin başta teorik, pratik ve dini olmak üzere pek çok açıdan ciddi eleştirilerle karşı karşıya olduğu ortaya konulmuştur. (shrink)

In this paper, I argue that the unique contributions of Foucault’s late work to critical social theory can be identified in the ways in which power relations are refined as the material condition of “politics” as distinguished from that of law, where “politics”: includes both competitive and goal-oriented strategic actions and interactions, excludes the coercive technologies of law embodied in State institutions, presupposes “incomplete” reciprocity between actors engaged in directing others, always entails modes of revealing truth and acting upon the (...) self. By contextualising the break between pastoral power and direction in the 1979–1980 lectures, I show how for the late Foucault, power relations constitute the material condition of “politics” precisely because, unlike relations of control or coercion, their aims and objectives remain open to the possibility of building new relationships and potentially more “political” forms of social action. I conclude by situating this major distinction within Foucault’s unfulfilled project to study the “military dimension” of society, and the relevance and urgency of this project for contemporary struggles against new forms of militarism and austerity. (shrink)

Is the idea that the self‐determination of all citizens influences progress towards democracy not merely a dream that breaks itself against the hard historical reality of political societies? Is not the same fate reserved for all pedagogical innovations in democratic education that depend on this great dream? It is commonplace to assert this logic to demonstrate the inapplicability of the ideas of both democracy and of democratic education. Though this argument is prominent and recurring in the history of political and (...) educative ideas, in response we can ask ourselves if the gap between the ideal and the reality is effectively insuperable and must be considered an incontestable fact. The double objective of this article is to determine explicitly the meaning and extent of this gap in the context of democracy and of education and to demonstrate that this gap is neither static nor permanent, but is susceptible to being narrowed, from generation to generation. (shrink)

Hegel's rejection of the Kantian thing-in-itself makes the "an sich" an ingredient in experience—that about a thing which is not yet present to us is what it is "an sich." Hegel bars thus any philosophical appeal to anything construed as atemporal, a path which I argue was also taken by Nietzsche, Foucault, Rorty, and Habermas. Unlike them, however, Hegel pursues a project of systematic philosophy, which now consists in showing how temporal things mutually support one another. The recent Continental philosophers (...) I discuss do not share this systematic conception; hence some of their most distinctive insights and problems. (shrink)

It is a hallmark of the Frankfurt School tradition of critical theory that it has consistently made philosophical reflection a central component of its overall project. Indeed, the core identity that this tradition has been able to maintain arguably stems from the fact that a number of key philosophical assumptions have been shared by the generations of thinkers involved in it. These assumptions form a basic ‘philosophical matrix’, whose main aim is to allow for a ‘critique of reason’, the heart (...) of the critique of modern society, which emphasises the collective, historically situated and naturalistically grounded nature of rationality. In this matrix, Feuerbach's place has been only a minor one. This paper aims to show that there is more to be retrieved from Feuerbach for critical theory than at first meets the eye. The first section identifies key conceptual features that are shared by the central authors of the Frankfurt School. They signal a collectivist and materialist shift from Kant to Marx via Hege.. (shrink)

Mit dem Aufsatz wird der Versuch unternommen, eine beginnende interdisziplinäre Diskussion zwischen praktischer Philosophie und (politischer) Ökonomie fortzuführen und durch das Angebot einer synoptischen Interpretation auch zu vertiefen. Sowohl politische Ökonomie als auch praktische Philosophie sehen sich mehr und mehr der Anforderung ausgesetzt,zur Lösung praktischer Probleme beizutragen. Dies erscheint unmöglich, solange nicht auch normative Sätze Ergebnis wissenschaftlicher Analyse sein können; dazu bedarf es aber eines Begründungsbegriffes, der einerseits normativen Sätzen Raum gibt, andererseits die Anforderungen, die an die Begründung normativer Sätze (...) zu stellen sind, so scharf faßt, daß Normatives, statt wie bisher beliebig, nunmehr nachprüfbar wird. Ein solcher Begründungsbegriff wurde von Friedrich Kambartel über die Beschreibung eines Verfahrens (sokratischer Dialog), in dem die Begründung stattfindet, erarbeitet und für die Ökonomie vorgeschlagen. Dagegen wird in dieser Abhandlung, ausgehend von der These, daß Begründungsmängel in aller Regel Verfahrensmängel sind, eine Kritik des sokratischen Dialogverfahrens im Wege der politisch-ökonomischen vergleichenden Analyse alternativer Verfahren der Konsensbildung (hier: Markt, Abstimmung, Dialog) vorgetragen. (shrink)

_Reinvigorates Jürgen Habermas’ early critical theory._.