A Normative framework of Public Bioethical discourse

Abstract

Public debate shows that the twin aspirations of public justification and better argumentation ought to guide policy-making in Singapore. I take up a philosophical analysis of public justification in the work of Audi, Rawls and Habermas, and show their relevance and significance for bioethical debate.

My critique of these authors will lead to a revised normative conception of public ethical discourse, which also underscores the importance of cultivating appropriate character-based discourse virtues central to ethical literacy, rationality and reflective equilibrium. I analyse the possibility of an appeal to better argumentation, examine its normative presuppositions, and provide guidelines and criteria for civically-oriented bioethics practice.

The significance of my thesis lies in the various recommendations for moving public bioethical deliberation forward, including an emphasis on moral argumentation. The result is a conception of virtue epistemic democratic legitimacy in bioethical discourse and practice. This has important implications for civic engagement and education in any pluralistic, deliberative democracy.