Dubious Premises—Evil Conclusions: Moral Reasoning at the Nuremberg Trials

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 9 (2):261-274 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Fifty years ago, 23 Nazi physicians were defendants before a military tribunal in Nuremberg, charged with crimes against humanity. During that trial, the world learned of their personal roles in human experimentation with political and military prisoners, mass eugenic sterilizations, state-ordered euthanasia of the and the program of genocide we now know as the Holocaust. These physicians, and their colleagues who did not stand trial, were universally condemned in the free world as ethical pariahs. The term became the paradigm for total defection from the most rudimentary elements of medical morality. The caduceus literally became the instrument of the swastika

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

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

The cognitive processes in informal reasoning.Victoria F. Shaw - 1996 - Thinking and Reasoning 2 (1):51 – 80.
Logical Consequence.J. C. Beall, Greg Restall & Gil Sagi - 2019 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Who Needs Valid Moral Arguments?Mark T. Nelson - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (1):35-42.
Deductive Reasoning.Joshua Schechter - 2013 - In Hal Pashler (ed.), The Encyclopedia of the Mind. SAGE Reference.
The nature of nonmonotonic reasoning.Charles G. Morgan - 2000 - Minds and Machines 10 (3):321-360.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-24

Downloads
40 (#347,838)

6 months
3 (#445,838)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references