Empirical Bioethics—Historical, Philosophical, and Methodological Perspectives
{"Empirical":[0],"bioethics":[1,160],"has":[2],"evolved":[3],"over":[4],"the":[5,24,40,58,63,79,83,104,116,123,147],"past":[6],"two":[7],"decades":[8],"largely":[9,54],"in":[10,115,152,186,203],"response":[11],"to":[12,20,62,88,195],"critiques":[13],"that":[14,86,126,158],"abstract":[15],"moral":[16,166],"reasoning":[17,144],"often":[18],"fails":[19],"adequately":[21],"engage":[22],"with":[23,103,142],"lived":[25],"experiences":[26],"of":[27,39,46,66,76,149],"those":[28],"affected":[29],"by":[30],"biomedical":[31],"decisions.":[32],"This":[33,100],"paper":[34,132],"offers":[35],"a":[36,96],"thorough":[37],"overview":[38],"historical,":[41],"methodological,":[42],"and":[43,73,109,121,145],"philosophical":[44,98,124],"foundations":[45],"empirical":[47,77,93,108,140,153,159],"bioethics,":[48,78],"tracing":[49],"its":[50,170,172],"development":[51],"from":[52,92],"traditional,":[53],"theoretical":[55],"approaches":[56],"through":[57],"so-called":[59],"\\"empirical":[60],"turn\\"":[61],"contemporary":[64],"diversity":[65],"empirical-ethical":[67],"methodologies.":[68],"After":[69],"examining":[70,122],"both":[71],"broad":[72],"narrow":[74],"conceptions":[75],"discussion":[80],"focuses":[81],"on":[82],"integrated":[84],"approach":[85],"aims":[87],"derive":[89],"normative":[90,110,143],"conclusions":[91,173],"findings":[94],"within":[95],"coherent":[97],"framework.":[99],"requires":[101],"engaging":[102],"epistemological":[105],"tension":[106],"between":[107],"approaches,":[111],"which":[112],"is":[113],"rooted":[114],"widely":[117],"recognized":[118],"fact-value":[119],"distinction":[120],"frameworks":[125],"could":[127],"support":[128],"such":[129],"integration.":[130],"The":[131,155],"further":[133],"outlines":[134],"key":[135],"methodological":[136],"models":[137],"for":[138,164,184,199],"linking":[139],"data":[141],"explores":[146],"challenge":[148],"ethical":[150,178,197],"relativism":[151],"bioethics.":[154],"analysis":[156],"concludes":[157],"provides":[161],"valuable":[162],"tools":[163],"context-sensitive":[165],"reflection,":[167],"while":[168],"acknowledging":[169],"limitations:":[171],"serve":[174],"neither":[175],"as":[176,181,191],"universal":[177],"rules":[179],"nor":[180],"prescriptive":[182],"\\"recipes\\"":[183],"decision-making":[185],"concrete":[187],"situations":[188],"but":[189],"rather":[190],"carefully":[192],"reasoned":[193],"efforts":[194],"articulate":[196],"guidance":[198],"practical":[200],"challenges":[201],"grounded":[202],"real-world":[204],"contexts.":[205]}
Authors
- Urh Grošelj (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5246-9869)
- Meta Rus (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6553-1580)
- Erika Zelko (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2730-9118)
Institutions
- Johannes Kepler University of Linz (AT)
- University of Ljubljana (SI)
- Ljubljana University Medical Centre (SI)
- National Institute of Chemistry (SI)
- Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (DE)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
- Published
- 2026-09-17
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-026-10619-8
- Primary Topic
- Ethics in medical practice
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00