从现象学视角探索基因伦理学的理论进路

发布时间：2018-06-25 02:52

本文选题：主观论 + 境遇论　；参考：《渤海大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：库尔特·拜尔茨将基因伦理学分为两大立场——主观论与实体论。实体论坚持,人是统一、独立、具有严格规定性的实体,基因技术对这一实体的不适当干预和控制会引发严重的伦理灾难。由于这一立场无法解释人类历史上不断改造自然和改造自身的事实,又缺乏理论根据,作为基因伦理学的哲学基础是不适宜的。主观论针锋相对,强调人的主观能动性和道德主体性,把基因技术能够带来的自我进化与促进道德自主性、拓展人的尊严统一起来。主观论的问题是:无法明确指出自我进化的目标和方向,无法保证理论的社会有效性。传统基因伦理学的困难,根源于其研究视野始终没能摆脱“技术-伦理”、“主体-客体”等二元对立的分析框架。本文从现象学出发,包括海德格尔的存在论哲学、梅洛-庞蒂的身体现象学以及道德物化理论,尝试破解传统基因伦理学的两大局限,提出以境遇的有限性和发生性为基本指导性原则,通过“协商陪审”和“技术调解”实现社会有效性的境遇论设想,作为探索基因伦理学理论进路的新的尝试。
[Abstract]:Kurt Bayertz divides genetic ethics into two main positions: subjective theory and entity theory. Entity theory persists, human beings are unified, independent, and strictly prescriptive entities. The improper intervention and control of the entity by gene technology will cause serious ethical disaster. Because this position cannot explain the continuous transformation of nature in human history. As the philosophical basis of genetic ethics, the philosophical basis of genetic ethics is unsuitable. Subjective theory is opposite, the subjective initiative and moral subjectivity of human beings are emphasized, and the self evolution of gene technology can be brought into unity with the promotion of moral autonomy and expansion of human dignity. The goal and direction of self evolution can not guarantee the social validity of the theory. The difficulty of traditional genetic ethics is rooted in the analysis frame of the two element opposition of "technology ethics" and "subject object" from his research field. From the phenomenology, this paper includes Heidegger's existentialism philosophy, Melo Ponty's body It embodies the theory of imaging and moral materialization, tries to solve the two limitations of traditional genetic ethics, and puts forward a tentative plan to realize the social validity through the "negotiation of jury" and "technical mediation" as a basic guiding principle, and a new attempt to explore the approach of the theory of Genetic Ethics.
【学位授予单位】：渤海大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：B82-0

【相似文献】