Alle H Tten Es Wissen K Nnen Medizinethik In Der Krise Life Is A Story Story One

Am größten Menschenversuch der Medizingeschichte scheiterte die Medizinethik in kläglicher Weise. Grundlagen wie persönliche Autonomie und informierte Zustimmung wurden ersetzt durch einen opportunistischen Utilitarismus. Anstatt die Entwicklung der mRNA-Geninjektionen einer medizinethischen Bewertung zu unterziehen, wurde peinliche Rechtfertigungsphilosophie betrieben. Die Ausrede: "Das haben wir nicht wissen können", gilt nicht, denn: "Alle hätten es wissen können". Leider hat Immanuel Kant immer noch recht: "Es ist so bequem, unmündig zu sein". Einer durch perfide Täuschungen hypnotisierten Angstgesellschaft müssen dringend die Augen geöffnet werden. Und eine neue Medizinethik muss wieder den hehren Grundsatz des "Primum non nocere" würdigen. Die mRNA-Gentechnologie am Menschen muss als das entlarvt werden, was sie ist: Allmachtsphantasie und Machbarkeitswahn.

Critical Realism and Spirituality contextualizes, delineates, explores and critiques the turn to spirituality and religion in critical realism, which has been under way since the mid-1990s, as well as telling its story. It provides incisive discussion and anaysis of the following broad questions: How does critical realism allow and facilitate the resolution of problems in the area of comparative religion? Can it help you to justify your own faith or belief? What are the implications of the new philosophy of meta-Reality for traditional religious studies and how we organize and conduct our lives? A range of distinguished critical realists, theological critical realists and scholars working with related approaches (Roland Benedikter, Roy Bhaskar, Terry Eagleton, Mervyn Hartwig, Alister McGrath, Markus Molz, Jamie Morgan, Andrew Wright and others) bring their talents to bear on this task. While their personal beliefs span the whole spectrum from theism to atheism, they are united by the desire to open up a space for dialogue of one kind or another (intra-faith, inter-faith and/or extra-faith), promoting mutual understanding, respect and the unity and capability for collective emancipatory action on a global scale that humanity is so sorely in need of. This book is therefore, essential reading for students and academics alike in Religous Studies, Theology and Philosophy.

Within democratic societies, a deep division exists over the nature of community and the grounds for political life. Should the political order be neutral between competing conceptions of the good life or should it be based on some such conception? This book addresses one crucial set of problems raised by this division: What bases should officials and citizens employ in reaching political decisions and justifying their positions? Should they feel free to rely on whatever grounds seem otherwise persuasive to them, like religious convictions, or should they restrict themselves to "public reasons," reasons that are shared within the society or arise from the premises of liberal democracy? Kent Greenawalt argues that fundamental premises of liberal democracy alone do not provides answers to these questions, that much depends on historical and cultural contexts. After examining past and current practices and attitudes in the United States, he offers concrete suggestions for appropriate principles relevant to American society today. This incisive and timely analysis by one of our leading legal philosophers should attract a wide and diverse readership of scholars, practitioners, and concerned citizens.

How far may Americans properly rely on their religious beliefs when they make and defend political decisions? For example, are ordinary citizens or legislators doing something wrong when they consciously allow their decisions respecting abortion laws to be determined by their religious views? Despite its intense contemporary relevance, the full dimensions of this issue have until now not been thoroughly examined. Religious Convictions and Political Choice represents the first attempt to fill this gap. Beginning with an account of the basic premises of our liberal democracy, Greenawalt moves to a comparison between rational secular grounds of decision and grounds based on religious convictions. He discusses particular issues such as animal rights and abortion, showing how religious convictions can bear on an individual's decisions about them, and inquires whether reliance on such convictions is compatible with liberal democratic premises. In conclusion, he argues that citizens cannot be expected to rely exclusively on rational, secular grounds.

"This book puts forward the most sophisticated and subtle treatment available on the relation between religion and politics and church (synagogue, mosque, temple) and state. Thiemann has taken our impoverished discourse on these matters to new heights and higher ground." --Cornel West. [from back cover.]

This anthology of articles collected by a cast of award-winning scholars in the field of public health illustrates that promoting and protecting human rights is fundamental to promoting and protecting health. New issues covered in this volume include: emerging technologies; family and health; responding to violence; and methods and strategies.

This vigorous debate between two distinguished philosophers presents two views on a topic of worldwide importance: the role of religion in politics. Audi argues that citizens in a free democracy should distinguish religious and secular considerations and give them separate though related roles. Wolterstorff argues that religious elements are both appropriate in politics and indispensable to the vitality of a pluralistic democracy. Each philosopher first states his position in detail, then responds to and criticizes the opposing viewpoint. Written with engaging clarity, Religion in the Public Square will spur discussion among scholars, students, and citizens.