Essay on Engelhardt’s View of Bioethics in a Secular Age
“Reason has not been able to substitute for God (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” This is the thrust of Engelhardt’s view of bioethics (and ethics). Engelhardt documents the failed aspirations of the Enlightenment regarding a morality based on reason in which governments would be able to establish their authority through moral rationality, and all citizens would be part of a moral community. He termed this, the Western Philosophical Project, which was born in Greece. Engelhardt deemed this project as flawed because there were background assumptions of a pluralistic society that were necessary for what an individual or group seeks (s) to prove. He was adamant that there is no bioethics/ethics that can be established as canonical by philosophers. Post-modernism had unleashed pluralism where there can be no actual or hypothetical moral community. With no original moral/canonical position to work from, bioethical and secular pluralism is ultimately intractable, and, therefore, there will never be an impartial rational point of view. This led Engelhardt to ask, “How ought one rank such cardinal human goods as liberty, equality, prosperity, and security, and why (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017)?”
How much goods are ranked will determine a particular morality or bioethics. Through this intractable plurality of post-modernism and the lack of an anchor through God, moral choices are just lifestyle choices or death-style choices according to Engelhardt (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017). He goes on to state that after God, “everything, including God is without meaning. At stake is not just God as an object of religious devotion, but God as a point of final and ultimate, epistemic, and axiological reference (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).”
Engelhardt highlights the fact that Christendom has broken and is a fallen concept. A secular orthodoxy has replaced it, “We have entered an age resolutely set after God (3).” In After God, the point is made that a God’s-eye perspective among humans has been lost. Sin and any recognition of God have been erased from the space of public appearance, and “without a recognition of sin, repentance is now impossible (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” Engelhardt makes the point that our society has a post-modern character and that our bioethics/ethics are no longer well-moored. Our bioethics/ethics come from a “perspective of sound rational argument plural nouns (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017)” with no evidence of the influence or perspective of God, and our current dominant secular culture provides no firm grounding for bioethics/ethics. Engelhardt does not deny that we have always lived in a world of agnostics and atheists, but he correctly points out that they were not always the dominant culture. Demoralization and deflation weigh hard on the meaning of morality, bioethics, and political legitimacy in a post-modern society (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017). What implications does the predominance of a secular culture do on our understanding of bioethics? With the advent of post-modernity, Western Christendom softened, and God became more of a philosophical idea than the “Person of the Father, Who begets the Son, and from Whom alone the Holy Spirit proceeds (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” In fact, Engelhardt instructs us that,
“God as the most personal of all was obscured through a theology with a robust philosophical overlay that rendered the theological approach to God primarily one of scholarship, not of prayerful ascetical struggle (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).”
Engelhardt believed that all this was not supposed to be an academic undertaking, but a process of theology that involves encounters with Him, not just an intellectual exercise. He did not believe for one moment that through philosophical reflection a human being could argue the correct path “to the right norms for life and the true goals of human existence (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).”
Engelhardt’s books, The Foundations of Bioethics and The Foundations of Christian Bioethics are discussed in After God (H Tristram Engelhardt, 1996; Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2000). These two works represent the two sides of one coin in regard to his works, which some scholars have found confusing or at odds with each other. However, they actually are not:
“The Foundations of Bioethics and The Foundations of Christian Bioethics, are essentially interconnected. The first demonstrates the severe limits and character of secular-philosophical reflection. It explains why the morality of the emerging secular, global culture, despite its aspirations for consensus, is marked by intractable plurality. The second point is the way out of the moral and metaphysical disorientation that characterizes this emerging global culture (Iltis & Cherry, 2014).”
Engelhardt goes into great detail in After God to explain the secular morality and bioethics of today cannot really be truly adequate because they are not created through a God’s-eye perspective. He leaves us with the question of “whether generally recognizable moral and political authority makes sense after acknowledgment of God’s existence is lost (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” Essentially the dominant secular culture of today has discounted a transcendent God and left us One of immanence; a God we could mix into our everyday lives, a watered-down version of a once transcendent truth. The problem from his view was that this traditional Christendom was born of a “European medieval synthesis (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017),” not the Christianity of the first 300-400 years after the birth of Jesus Christ. In other words, not the Eastern Orthodox Church, i.e., the original and all-enduring church. His writings indicate that he was sorely affected by the outcome of Vatican II (O’Malley, 2010). From his earliest questions about faith in the 1950s to his conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy in 1991 he was left with the conclusion that one cannot accept a plurality of views regarding the divine in which one can pick and choose their particular truth, “One needs a definitive, socially and historically unconditioned moral perspective, not just one among a multiplicity of webs of moral institutions (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” He viewed ethics and bioethics outside of Western moral philosophy. In other words, he questioned the Western moral-philosophical project. He questioned the moral viewpoint espoused by the Roman church (post Vatican II) and was left with the conclusion that he must leave the Roman Catholic church. “I had come to encounter and to concede a highly politically incorrect truth: the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church is Orthodox Christianity(Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017).” This is no small point in Engelhardt’s philosophy, he believed that true Christian belief only comes through the Eastern Orthodox Church or the original church. This is the underpinning of his view of bioethics.
In the Vaughn’s 3rd Ed new text concerning bioethics in bio-medical issues, principalities and cases. The texts does exploration to matters pertaining philosophy, medicine issues, social and even legal main effective bioethical issues. It does introduction to the ethical matters in the medical operations. It extents to bringing effect to through bioethics and even the moral intelligence. Vaughn’s text envelops most personal drives, moral beliefs and also the routine for evaluating them. This new edition owns several characteristics that boost...
This European synthesis, in his view, was the basis for providing a secular state with a secular moral authority guided by reason through philosophical arguments that could be agreed on by all (Hugo Tristram Engelhardt, 2017). Engelhardt rejected this whole-heartedly and cautioned the readers to be aware of the fact that, “there still remain powerful, but unfounded philosophical expectations regarding the existence of a generally secularly justifiable morality, bioethics, and political authority that persist as remnants from the via antiqua...
Introduction: There are many advantages and disadvantages when it comes to genetically engineering a baby. There are also reasons why people would want to genetically engineer a baby. In the movie ‘My Sister’s Keeper’, a couple used genetic engineering to prevent their daughter from being taken away by cancer. Although, they got these body parts from the baby they made and the problem with that is if they continue taking body parts from her, then she will soon die while...
Love has a variety of meaning it depends on the person on how he or she understands it. However, for Judith Butler saying “I love you” is a cliché and she is dissecting the actual sentence, for her the thought of commitment through marriage or any symbolism is a senseless matter. She concludes that because she believes that circumstances change so as well as the people. Hence, to be able to give a commitment to someone or something you should...
There are some conflicting answers to the following questions in our daily lives such as; you have to pass the exam successfully. To achieve your goal, shall you cheat on the exam or rather study hard? Patient X needs kidney transplantation, another patient is dying due to a car accident that has a normal kidney. Shall the doctor allow let the critical patient to die fast and transplant the kidney to the other patient? Two competitive companies prepared a new...
Bioethics deals with addressing ethical troubles in healthcare, medication, research, biotechnology, and the surroundings. Typically these problems are addressed from many distinctive disciplines. People make a contribution to the bioethics discussion by drawing on understanding methods from the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. Professionals working within the discipline of bioethics consist of philosophers, scientists, fitness administrators, lawyers, theologians, anthropologists, disability advocates, and social workers. People may teach, do studies, and deal with patients within the scientific place or work...
This paper analyzes the quality versus quantity of longevity of life in accordance with society and bioethics. This is followed through by the analysis of Dr. Emmanuel’s “Why I Hope to Die at 75” article and a rebuttal to it from “Bioethics and Why I Hope to Live Beyond Age 75 Attaining Wisdom!” by Miguel Faria. Dr. Emanuel discusses the destructive notion of the “American Immortal” by how it imposes in supportive cost on society and how old age deprives...
Imam Al-Shafi, an Islamic Jurist, has significantly contributed to the Islamic religious tradition through his knowledge and systematic methodology in developing a new science in his approach to jurisprudence. Imam Al-Shafi has contributed to the Islamic living tradition by reconciling the relationships between the Hanafi Madhab and Maliki Madhab, providing a reliable process of Jurisprudence. Sufism is a spiritual and mystical philosophy of Islam focused on a direct connection to Allah by forgoing material goods and relationships. Imam Al-Shafi gave...
This essay will attempt to discuss in detail the definitions of biosafety and bioethics, the different aspects surrounding biosafety and bioethics, as well as prominent biosafety and bioethics issues with regard to biotechnology and how they can be solved. Furthermore, how risk assessment plays a role in biosafety will be discussed, as well as certain suggestions to increase the level of biosafety. Laboratory biosafety will also be discussed briefly. Ways in which ethical issues regarding biotechnology can be addressed will...
01 / 09
Fair Use Policy
EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via email@example.com.
We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.