<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Ethical Perspectives</title>
	<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=journal&amp;journal_code=EP</link>
	<description>Recent articles</description>
	<item>
		<title>Introduction</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045849</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045849</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Introduction
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Truth, Meaning and the Common World</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
           <guid>10.2143/EP.16.4.0000000</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045850</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:57:35 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			In the first part of the present study (EP 16.3, pp. 337-359) we focused our attention on Arendt’s use of the concept common sense as &lt;i&gt;le bon sens&lt;/i&gt;, i.e. a cognitive faculty or a ‘sixth sense’ that enables us to grasp the common and worldly context of our experiences and therefore also enables us to grasp factual truth and to tell truth from falsehood. Arendt, however, also makes use of the concept common sense to imply a specific faculty of judgment, which she ultimately designates with the expression &#039;community sense&#039;.
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>The Harm of Premature Death</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045851</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045851</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:18:28 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Although an age-old problem, the debate over immortality has become reanimated in light of recent advances in life extension technologies, accompanied by an ever-growing body of enthusiasts, both within academic circles as well as the public in general. For these people, death is no longer a natural process, but a disease, and one that might be prevented. It seems that the desire for immortality is a result, in part, of a profound sense of incompleteness and frustration that death will rob us of our future goals and achievements. Consequently, this paper takes as its main focus an individual who affirms life and does not wish it to end, at least prematurely. ‘Prematurely’ is understood as occurring before the individual desires life to end, no matter what age or condition they are in. If premature death is a harm, however, does this imply that ‘more life’ is always better? Ultimately this paper questions whether the desire for immortality (or at least life-extension) would rectify the problems it was originally intended to solve.
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Care and Justice</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045852</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045852</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:20:21 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Ethics of care and ethics of justice have been thought to address different spheres of human life; an ethics of care the personal sphere, an ethics of justice the political sphere. Care ethicists do not necessarily consider these ethics to be mutually exclusive (an ethics of care could, for instance, complement an ethics of justice, just as the personal sphere complements the political sphere). They assume, nonetheless, that if these ethics address different spheres, an ethics of care cannot address the same issues as an ethics of justice. Michael Slote disagrees. He argues that an ethics of care can address the same issues as traditional approaches to justice, and so offer a complete approach to morality. Slote believes his ethics can address issues of justice by providing an account of those obligations correlative of rights. This paper argues that Slote’s ethics of care is unable to sustain such obligations as his ethics is not action-guiding, but is instead concerned with the post-hoc evaluation of motives and actions.
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Parental Refusal to Terminate Pregnancy in face of a Strongly Negative Prognosis of Neonatal Viability</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045853</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045853</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:21:52 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			During the last few years, several maternity departments in Paris hospitals have registered an increasing number of parental refusals to terminate pregnancies on the basis of foetal abnormality. These refusals have provoked disagreement and tension between parents and medical staff within the departments in question. The present contribution will endeavour to advance a number of ethical arguments and an analysis of these moral dilemmas with a view to justifying the need to fully account for the moral preferences of the parents who refuse to have their pregnancy interrupted.
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Announcement</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045854</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045854</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:22:25 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Conference announcement
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Book Reviews</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045855</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045855</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:22:37 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Book reviews
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Contributors</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045856</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045856</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:23:13 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Contributors
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Overview - Volume 16 (2009)</title>
		<author>poj@peeters-leuven.be</author>
		<guid>http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/EP.16.4.2045857</guid>
		<link>http://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&amp;id=2045857</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:24:53 GMT</pubDate>
		<description>
			Table of Contents of &lt;i&gt;Ethical Perspectives&lt;/i&gt; volume 16 (2009).
		</description>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
