Book review

If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journals. Furthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

Header Content Author and article information References Comments

Prometheus

Volume 36, Issue 3

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Book review

Published

review-essay

Author(s): Giles Birchley

Publication date (Print): 1 September 2020

Journal: Prometheus

Publisher: Pluto Journals

Bookmark

Content

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (doi): 10.2307/j50022063

Journal ID (jcode): prometheus

Title: Prometheus

Publisher: Pluto Journals

ISSN: 0810-9028

ISSN: 1470-1030

Publication date (Print): 1 September 2020

Volume: 36

Issue: 3 ( doiID: 10.13169/prometheus.36.issue-3 )

Pages: 277-288

Affiliations

Giles Birchley Centre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, UK giles.birchley@ 123456bristol.ac.uk

Article

Publisher ID: prometheus.36.3.0277

DOI: 10.13169/prometheus.36.3.0277

SO-VID: 12f95665-6c20-414d-a153-60ee6080f37d

License:

All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

History

Product

Empirical Bioethics: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives , Jonathan Ives, Michael Dunn and Alan Cribb(eds) (2016) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, xiii +274pp., £93, hardback, ISBN: 9781107078475

Custom metadata

lang eng

ScienceOpen disciplines: Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics

References

Davies, R., Ives, J. and Dunn, M. (2015) ‘A systematic review of empirical bioethics methodologies’, BMC Medical Ethics, 16, 15.
De Vries, R. (2004) ‘How can we help? From “sociology in” to “sociology of” bioethics’, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 32, 2, pp.279–92.
Dewey, J. (1917) ‘The need for a recovery of philosophy’ in Boydston, J. (ed.) (1980) John Dewey, The Middle Works 1899–1924, vol. 10, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL, 1980.
Doris, J. (2002) Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behaviour, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Fulford, B. (2004) ‘Facts/values: ten principles of values-based medicine’ in Radden, J. (ed.) International Perspectives in Philosophy and Psychiatry. The Philosophy of Psychiatry: A Companion, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.205–34.
Hedgecoe, A. (2002) ‘Critical bioethics: beyond the social science critique of applied ethics’, Bioethics, 18, 2, pp.120–43.
Heidegger, M. (1968) (trans Gray, J.) What is Called Thinking, Harper & Row, New York.
Ives, J. and Draper, H. (2009) ‘Appropriate methodologies for empirical bioethics: it's all relative’, Bioethics, 23, 4, pp.249–58.
Majid, U. and Vanstone, M. (2018) ‘Appraising qualitative research for evidence syntheses: a compendium of quality appraisal tools’, Qualitative Health Research, 28, 13, pp.2115–31.
Miller, C. (2013) Moral Character: An Empirical Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Comments

Comment on this article

[1] Davies, R., Ives, J. and Dunn, M. (2015) ‘A systematic review of empirical bioethics methodologies’, BMC Medical Ethics, 16, 15.

[2] De Vries, R. (2004) ‘How can we help? From “sociology in” to “sociology of” bioethics’, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 32, 2, pp.279–92.

[3] Dewey, J. (1917) ‘The need for a recovery of philosophy’ in Boydston, J. (ed.) (1980) John Dewey, The Middle Works 1899–1924, vol. 10, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL, 1980.

[4] Doris, J. (2002) Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behaviour, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[5] Fulford, B. (2004) ‘Facts/values: ten principles of values-based medicine’ in Radden, J. (ed.) International Perspectives in Philosophy and Psychiatry. The Philosophy of Psychiatry: A Companion, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp.205–34.

[6] Hedgecoe, A. (2002) ‘Critical bioethics: beyond the social science critique of applied ethics’, Bioethics, 18, 2, pp.120–43.

[7] Heidegger, M. (1968) (trans Gray, J.) What is Called Thinking, Harper & Row, New York.

[8] Ives, J. and Draper, H. (2009) ‘Appropriate methodologies for empirical bioethics: it's all relative’, Bioethics, 23, 4, pp.249–58.

[9] Majid, U. and Vanstone, M. (2018) ‘Appraising qualitative research for evidence syntheses: a compendium of quality appraisal tools’, Qualitative Health Research, 28, 13, pp.2115–31.

[10] Miller, C. (2013) Moral Character: An Empirical Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.