Vilhjálmur Árnason’s Call for Expanding Bioethical Discourse

This article explores Vilhjálmur Árnason’s critique of contemporary bioethics, particularly its limited focus on individualistic principles, and its neglect of the broader social implications of emerging technologies. Vilhjálmur1 argues that the commonly used “four principles approach”—respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice—is inadequate for addressing the complex ethical and societal impacts of new technologies. He suggests that ethical evaluations must extend beyond immediate individual risks to consider broader societal consequences. In critiquing overly individual-centered bioethical frameworks, Vilhjálmur raises a critical theoretical question: what kind of ethical theory does bioethics truly require? This examination considers whether Vilhjálmur’s critique of the four-principles approach is justified and whether a more expansive ethical framework or theory of value is needed to specify and rank bioethical principles. By scrutinizing collective values like solidarity and the notion that “the personal is political” this paper suggests that new layers of disagreement arise, moving beyond traditional debates over moral theories. In a diverse society with conflicting values, such conflicts may be unavoidable. However, by highlighting the interconnection between individual moral agency and socio-political context, Vilhjálmur underscores the importance of self-reflection on personal values and the need to seek understanding across differing viewpoints in bioethical discussions. Keywords: bioethics, personalized medicine, genetic database, four-principles approach, principlism, pluralism, value, ethical theory, personal is political, socio-political context