Abstract
The discussion in this volume has focused on the philosophical or theoretical issues concerning moral consensus. That “consensus” has become an important feature of bioethical analysis with hospital ethics committees and national commissions has also been noted along with the recognition of certain benefits to be achieved through this process. According to Engelhardt [12], consensus has the benefit of reducing conflicts among political groups and thereby increasing cooperation for intended goals. Consensus also provides a mechanism whereby diverse community groups and consumers of health care services (such as those who desire embryo transfer and in vitro fertilization procedures) can have their viewpoints considered. In time, a chronicle of moral positions could be created to provide the framework for a “rational” base for future decisions in these matters. However, the problems of consensus as a method for arriving at moral “rightness” are also well described by Bayertz and Engelhardt, as well as Moreno, who have thought deeply about these issues ([3]; [12]; [27]; [28]; see also [40]; [18]). The main presentations have articulated the important conceptual concerns in assessing the relevance of consensus as an approach to ethical decisions in biomedicine.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography
Applebaum, P. and Roth, L.H.: 1981, ‘Clinical Issues in the Assessment of Competency’, American Journal of Psychiatry 138, 1462–1467.
Ashton, R.H. and Ashton, A.H.: 1990, ‘Evidence-Responsiveness in Profession Judgment — Effects of Positive Versus Negative Evidence and Presentation Mode’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46, 1–19.
Bayertz, K.: 1994, ‘The Concept of Moral Consensus’, Philosophical Reflections in this volume, pp. 41–57.
Bell, B.E. and Loftus, E.F.: 1989, ‘Trivial Persuasion in the Courtroom: The Power of (a Few) Minor Details’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56, 669–679.
Bell, D.E.; Raiffa, H. and Tversky, A. (eds.): 1988, Decision Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge University Press, Massachusetts.
Caplan, C. and Miller, B.: 1987, ‘Group Decision Making and Normative Versus Informational Influence: Effects of Type of Issue and Assigned Decision Rule’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53, 306.
Casper, J.D. et al.: 1989, ‘Juror Decision Making, Attitudes, and the Hindsight Bias’, Law and Human Behavior 13, 291–310.
Chaiken, S.: 1979, ‘Communicator, Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37, 1387–1397.
Conley, J.M. et al..: 1978, ‘The Power of Language: Presentational Style in the Courtroom’, Duke Law Journal 6, 1375–1399.
Dane, F.C.: 1982, ‘Effects of Defendant’s and Victim’s Characteristics on Juror’s Verdicts’, in N.L. Kerr and R.M Bray (eds.), The Psychology of the Courtroom, Academic Press, New York, pp. 83–115.
Davis, R.: 1980, ‘Group Decision and Procedural Justice’, in M. Fishbein (ed.), Progress in Social Psychology, Volume I, L. Earlbaum Associates Incorp., Hillsdale, N.J.
Engelhardt, H.T. Jr.: 1994, ‘Consensus: How Much Can We Hope for? A Conceptual Exploration Illustrated by Recent Debates Regarding the Use of Human Reproductive Technologies’, in this volume, pp. 19–40.
Fischhoff, B.: 1975, ‘Hindsight/Foresight: The Effect of Outcome Knowledge on Judgment Under Uncertainty’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 15, 190–194.
Fischhoff, B. et al.: 1978, ‘How Safe is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes Towards Technological Risks and Benefits’, Policy Science 9, 127–152.
Greene, E. et al.: 1989, ‘The Impact of Physical Attractiveness, Gender, and Teaching Philosophy on Teacher Evaluations’, Journal of Educational Research 82, 172–177.
Hastie, et al.: 1983, Inside the Jury, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Hulka, B.S. et al.: 1979, ‘Peer Review in Ambulatory Care: Use of Explicit Criteria and Implicit Judgments’, Medical Care (Sup) 17 (3), 1–73.
Jennings, B.: 1991, ‘Possibilities of Consensus: Toward Democratic Moral Discourse’, The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16, 447–463.
Kalven, H. and Zeisel, H.: 1986, The American Jury, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Kassin, S.M.: 1990, ‘The American Jury: Handicapped in the Pursuit of Justice’, Ohio State Law Journal 51, 687.
Koran, L.M.: 1975, ‘The Reliability of Clinical Methods, Data and Judgments’, New England Journal of Medicine 293, Part 1, 642–646.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M.: 1980, Metaphors We Live By, University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.
Loftus, E. and Palmer, J.: 1974,‘Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the Interaction Between Language and Memory’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13, 585–589.
Mabry, E.A.: 1989, ‘Some Theoretical Implications of Female and Male Interaction in Unstructured Small-Groups’, Small Group Behavior 20, 536–550.
Marder, N.: 1987, Note: Gender Dynamics and Jury Deliberations, Yale Law Review 96, 593.
McNeil, B.J. et al.: 1982, ‘On the Elicitation of Preferences for Alternative Therapies’, New England Journal of Medicine 27; 306 (21), 1259–1262.
Moreno, J.D.: 1991, ‘Consensus, Contracts and Committees’, The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16, 393–408.
Moreno, J.D.: 1994, ‘Consensus by Committee: Philosophical and Social Aspects of Ethics Committees’, in this volume, pp. 145–162.
Noll, R.G.: 1971, Reforming Regulation, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
Noll, R.G. (ed.): 1985, Regulatory Policy and the Social Sciences, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Pallak, S.R.: 1983, ‘Salience of a Communicator’s Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion: A Heuristic Versus Systematic Processing Interpretation’, Soc. Cognition 2, 158–170.
Payne, B.C.: 1977, ‘Research in Quality Assessment and Utilization Review in Hospital and Ambulatory Settings’, in P.Y. Ertel and M.G. Aldridge (eds.), Medical Peer Review Theory and Practice, C.V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, pp. 335–355.
Richardson, S.M.: 1972, ‘Peer Review of Medical Care’, Medical Care 10,29–39.
Sigall, H. and Ostrove, N.: 1975, ‘Beautiful but Dangerous: Effects of Offender Attractiveness and Nature of the Crime on Juridic Judgment’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 410–414.
Slovic, P. et al.: 1979, ‘Rating and Risks’, Environment 21, 14–39.
Somer, R.: 1961, ‘Leadership in Group Geography’, Sociometry 24, 99–110.
Swann, W.B. et al.: 1982, ‘Where Leading Questions Can Lead: The Power of Conjecture in Social Interaction’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 42,1025–103
Tancredi, L. and Weisstub, D.N.: 1986, ‘The Ideology of Epidemiological Discourse in Law and Psychiatry: Ethical Implications’ in L. Tancredi (ed.), Ethical Issues in Epidemiological Research, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp. 157–1
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D.: 1974, ‘Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristic and Biases’, Science 185, 1124–1131.
Veatch, R.M.: 1991, ‘Consensus of Expertise: The Role of Consensus of Experts in Formulating Public Policy and Estimating Facts’, The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16, 427–446.
Zuckerman, M. et al.: 1981, ‘Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication of Deception’, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 14, 1–59.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Tancredi, L.R. (1994). The Empirical Limits of Consensus: Can Theory and Practice be Reconciled?. In: Bayertz, K. (eds) The Concept of Moral Consensus. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 46. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0860-7_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0860-7_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-4371-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-0860-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive