在對話中求同存異——和而不同的道德異鄉人

International Journal of Chinese and Comparative Philosophy of Medicine 20 (2):55-59 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English. 譚傑志(Joseph Tham) 教授在其 “Bioethics: Cross-Cultural Explorations”(Tham 2022, 13) —文中回顧了生命倫理學在發展過程中的世俗化歷程、聯合國教科文組織生命倫理學和人權主席(UNESCO Chair in Bioethics and Human Rights) 專案“生命倫理學、多元文化和宗教”在過去12年中的開展情況、以及最近這些年在生命倫理學領域中涉及文化多元性較為突出的問題。譚教授為生命倫理學領域中跨文化交流做出了卓越的貢獻,特別是其擔任上述項目負責人以來。生命倫理學領域中的很多主題,如代孕、墮胎、基因編輯等,既複雜乂敏感;可以想像,推動生命倫理學領域中跨文化交流是一件富挑戰的事情。正如譚教授所言:“……在不同宗教之間尋求共識或思想融合是一個相當宏大,甚至有些不現實的目標。”儘管如此,譚教授依然以極大的耐心和熱情通過改進專案中的對話機制,不斷地推動跨文化交流取得實質性進展和一系列學術成果。在這個過程中,如何讓不同文化和宗教背景的學者就某個主題進行有意義的對話成為關鍵。譚教授探索出的“主旨論文+跨文化回應”模式,即一位元學者基於自身的文化或宗教背景撰寫針對特定主題的主旨論文,由另一位不同文化背景的學者撰寫回應論文,為不同的文化和宗教搭建了對話的橋樑。(撮要取自內文首段) I am grateful for Professor Joseph Tham's efforts to improve cross-cultural dialogue on bioethics by continually updating the dialogue mechanisms in the “Bioethics, Multiculturalism and Religion Project,” conducted by the UNESCO Chair in Bioethics and Human Rights. The dialogue helps moral strangers to discuss their local cultures and to enter and learn about other cultures and religions. Through this process, moral strangers may find that they hold similar values. The dialogues have also shown us the importance of cross-culture differences. Although we can foster consensus or convergence on some issues, it should be noted that the differences in cultures and religions are not the second-best option when agreement cannot be reached. Such differences constitute the cultural diversity of the world and have their own values. Respecting these differences is just as important as seeking consensus or convergence.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,471

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Replies to Li and Fan.Dominic Farrell Lc & Joseph Tham Lc - 2021 - In Hon-Lam Li & Michael Campbell (eds.), Public Reason and Bioethics: Three Perspectives. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 181-194.
Replies to Farrell & Tham, and to Fan.Hon-Lam Li - 2021 - In Hon-Lam Li & Michael Campbell (eds.), Public Reason and Bioethics: Three Perspectives. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 135-180.
Replies to Li and Farrell–Tham.Ruiping Fan - 2021 - In Hon-Lam Li & Michael Campbell (eds.), Public Reason and Bioethics: Three Perspectives. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 195-203.
Health Care Decision Making.S. Joseph Tham & Marie Catherine Letendre - 2014 - The New Bioethics 20 (2):174-185.
The Secularization of Bioethics.S. Joseph Tham - 2008 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 8 (3):443-453.
The UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights: A Canon for the Ages?G. Trotter - 2009 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (3):195-203.
Tư tưởng của V.I. Lênin về quyền con người và giá trị thực tiễn ở Việt Nam: sách tham khảo.Mai Hương Hoàng - 2010 - Hà Nội: Nhà xuất bản Chính trị quốc gia. Edited by Hồng Hải Nguyễn.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-01-06

Downloads
4 (#1,630,023)

6 months
4 (#799,256)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references