The word ‘dignity’ is used in a variety of ways in bioethics, and this ambiguity has led some to argue that the term must be expunged from the bioethical lexicon. Such a judgment is far too hasty, however. In this article, the various uses of the word are classified into three serviceable categories: intrinsic, attributed, and inflorescent dignity. It is then demonstrated that, logically and linguistically, the attributed and inflorescent meanings of the word presuppose the intrinsic meaning. Thus, one cannot (...) conclude that these meanings are arbitrary and unrelated. This categorization and logical and linguistic analysis helps to unravel what seem to be contradictions in discourse about dignity and bioethics, and provides a hierarchy of meaning that has potential normative implications. (shrink)

This article explores the implications of what it means to moralize about future technological innovations. Specifically, I have been invited to comment on three papers that attempt to think about what seems to be an impending social reality: the availability of life-like sex robots. In response, I explore what it means to moralize about future technological innovations from a secular perspective, i.e., a perspective grounded in an immanent, socio-historically contingent view. I review the arguments of Nancy Jecker, Mark Howard and (...) Robert Sparrow, and Wang Jue and respond to their arguments concerning the permissible limits of human-robot sexual interaction. I argue that we are in a poor epistemic position regarding what the actual future human response will be towards sex robots and how it affects society generally. Given this poor epistemic position, I argue that moralizing about future trends like human-robot sex is difficult because we do not have the relevant facts to work with. Furthermore, I remain skeptical as to policy recommendations based on socio-historically contingent moral viewpoints both because they do not carry in principle moral authority to say what future others may or may not do with their property and they may not even appeal to future secular others, insofar as secular morality is plural and consistently develops anew. (shrink)

Background: In order to protect the autonomy of human subjects, we need to take their culture into account when we are obtaining informed consent. Objective and research design: This study describes the cultural aspects related to informed consent in health research and is based on electronic searches that were conducted using the Scopus, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases published between 2000 and 2013. A total of 25 articles were selected. Findings: Our findings indicate that cultural perspectives relating to the informed (...) consent process are essential during the whole research process and particularly crucial in the planning phase of a study. Our study indicates that appropriate communication between different stakeholders plays a vital role in cultural understanding. Discussion and conclusion: The researchers’ awareness of cultural differences and their ability to work in a culturally sensitive way are key factors in improving study participation and retention in a multicultural context. Taking cultural aspects into account during the whole research process improves the quality of research. (shrink)

(No abstract is available for this citation).