Abstract
Many bioethical disputes are conceptual. This means that people quarrel about the use of words that they see as important. The underlying idea is that whoever wins the verbal argument will also be ethically right
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S0963180104131022
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 72,564
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Human Dignity, Bioethics, and Human Rights.Matti Hayry & Tuija Takala - 2005 - Developing World Bioethics 5 (3):225-233.
Euthanasia, Ethics and Economics.Heta Häyry & Matti Häyry - 1990 - Bioethics 4 (2):154–161.
The Right to Genetic Ignorance Confirmed.Tuija Takala - 1999 - Bioethics 13 (3-4):288-293.
Aids Now.Heta Häyry & Matti Hayry - 1987 - Bioethics 1 (4):339–356.
We Should Not Allow Dissection of Animals.Steve F. Sapontzis - 1995 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 8 (2):181-189.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-08-24

Total views
33 ( #349,938 of 2,533,574 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #390,861 of 2,533,574 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes