Abstract
This essay is meant to honor H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr. and acknowledge the influence of his work in my wrestling with the philosophical, moral, and political predicament of Western culture. I recognize my debt to Tris in my intellectual development and in my scholarship, particularly in framing a proceduralist approach to ethics. That said, I also outline some points of divergence. While I am sympathetic with his diagnosis of the predicament of Western culture and its implications for bioethics, I raise some critical points concerning the notion of moral strangers and his approach to procedural ethics. First, I outline Tris’ diagnosis of the nature of secular morality in Western culture, which by default is procedural, and examine the concept of moral strangers. Second, I critically assess Tris’ proceduralism and argue that his framework does not take into account the possibility of overlapping frameworks between various moral communities. Hence, third, I argue for a weak form of proceduralism, which allows the establishment of moral discourse through a web of partial understandings of moral issues, in spite of moral disagreements. I conclude my essay by recognizing the significance of Tris’ criticism of mainstream bioethics and underscore the importance of his legacy for the future of the field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
I made an interesting observation early on as one of Tris’ assistants. We attended a conference at Notre Dame and, as traditionally happened, an evening cannot take place without a trip to a bar. I remember ordering a Samuel Adams beer (produced in Massachusetts), which created some convulsions on Tris’ face and some remarks such as “Oh a Yankee beer!”…indicative of his somewhat annoyance with my choice. Puzzled I carried on and enjoyed my beer. It took me few years to understand that I made a major “faux-pas” and the symbolism of my choice. A Shiner Bock (produced in Texas) would have been a more judicious choice!
- 2.
See W.T. Reich (2013) for an outline of the origins of bioethics in the culture of the 1960s. He points out that “[t]he rejection of the moral authority of the previous generation and the calling into question of the moral authority (or the absoluteness of the authority) of major social institutions including church and state were major characteristics of the 1960s counterculture. …In the 1960s America…was experiencing an enormous force of alienation, especially alienation from society, its values, and the authorities of its traditional institutions. …At the very least, an examination of the socio-cultural origins of bioethics in the 1960s should make us realize that bioethics did not arise simply as a response to a set of biomedical moral problems, but as a result of an enormous moral upheaval in our society, an awareness of the power of medical technocracy over our lives, and a healthy skepticism as to whether the power-oriented religious and civil authorities could solve those problems without contributions from all available intellectual and moral resources” (Reich 2013, 89, 91). For a full analysis of the birth of bioethics see Jonsen (1998).
- 3.
It must be emphasized that for Engelhardt consensus has a moral force in so far as there is univocal consensus. When consensus is the result of “a balance of political power” in which people of different moral traditions and assumptions are forced to collaborate, the moral legitimacy of consensus is difficult to establish (Engelhardt 1996, 63).
- 4.
Not only does Wildes argues that this position is not helpful, but he also stresses that it can be dangerous because it can make assumptions concerning particular communities that might not be true for some others (Wildes 2000, 126).
- 5.
Interestingly not all physicians in the United States are members of the American Medical Association. Statistics show that membership rose from 51 % in 1912 to 73 % in 1963. In 1990, membership was less than 50 % (Krause 1996, 45).
References
Beauchamp, T. L., and J. F. Childress. 2008. Principles of biomedical ethics, 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Engelhardt Jr., H.T. 1996. The foundations of bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Engelhardt Jr., H.T. 2013. Bioethics as a Liberal Roman Catholic Heresy: Critical reflections on the founding of bioethics. In The development of bioethics in the United States, ed. J.R. Garrett, F. Jotterand, and D.C. Ralston. Dordrecht: Springer.
Gutmann, A., and D. Thompson. 2000. Why deliberative democracy is different. In Democracy, ed. E.F. Paul, E.F. Miller, and J. Paul. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hunter, J.D. 1994. Before the shooting begins. Searching for democracy in America’s culture war. New York: The Free Press.
Jonsen, A. R. 1998. The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Krause, E.A. 1996. Death of the Guilds. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lyotard, J.-F. 1984. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
MacIntyre, A. 1984. After virtue, 2nd ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
MacIntyre, A. 1989. Whose justice? Which rationality? Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rawls, J. 1993. Political liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rawls, J. 1997. The idea of public reason revisited. The University of Chicago Law Review 64: 765–807.
Reich, W.T. 2013. A corrective for bioethical malaise: Revisiting the cultural influences that shaped the identity of bioethics. In The development of bioethics in the United States, ed. J.R. Garrett, F. Jotterand, and D.C. Ralston. Dordrecht: Springer.
Wildes, K. Wm. 2000. Moral acquaintances. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jotterand, F. (2015). Moral Strangers, Proceduralism, and Moral Consensus. In: Rasmussen, L., Iltis, A., Cherry, M. (eds) At the Foundations of Bioethics and Biopolitics: Critical Essays on the Thought of H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 125. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18965-9_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18965-9_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18964-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18965-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)