宗教学的生命倫理研究のための素描(下)私論
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In Part One of this article, the principal logics of bioethics were classified into three types : "standard bioethics," "the normative images of humans and nature," and "the concept of human relatedness." There are general tendencies that each logic is prominent in specific cultures, but different logics can also coexist in a given culture, so it is impossible to think that cultural differences produce different logics in bioethics. What then do the so-called "cultural differences in bioethical discourses" express? This question is the primary focus of Part Two. When Gerald McKenny discusses the origins of "standard bioethics," he points out that it is based on the Modern world-view, that is, the idea that humans should be liberated from natural necessity and destiny by using technologies, which he calls "Bacomian project." Because the "standard bioethics" is the "verbalization" of this Modern world-view, the modem person would find it persuasive. Tristram Engelhardt asserts that each community or religion can create an alternative discourse of bioethics, which can replace standard bioethics, if it can "verbalize" its vague sensitivities. He thinks that standard bioethics is "contentless," and that "content-ful" ethics are brought about only by particular communities or religions. Their discussions suggest that all bioethical discourses are the result of "verbalizing" some cultural heritage or religion. If so, how are cultural heritages or religious traditions "verbalized"? In order to clarify the process of "verbalization," a book whose title is Confucian Bioethics is dealt with as a case study. The editor and authors of the book try to construct an alternative bioethical discourse, in opposition to standard bioethics, by verbalizing the Confucian tradition in China. The "verbalization" process in this book can be summarized as follows; first, the authors attribute standard bioethics to the Western or Christian way of thinking, and point out that it is not universal but culturally conditioned. The fact that there were various elements in the Western tradition is neglected. Second, the authors think Confucianism to be opposite to the Western way of thinking, and emphasize or sift out the unique elements from Confucianism. In this process, the variety of Confucianism, which includes many elements resembling those in Western traditions, is neglected. Third, these unique or alternative elements of Confucianism are expressed in modern Western concepts. From this case study it is found that the "verbalization" of Confucianism is not traditional Confucianism itself ; it is a re-interpretation, reformation, or even creation of Confucianism. This is what the human beings have done for thousands of years. In the midst of changing circumstances, they have faced and interpreted traditions, thence creating new elements and overcoming the situation. Bioethics is the field where new kinds of world-views or religiosities are being created. Thus, we can conclude what religious studies should do to bioethical studies ; to observe and describe the various interpretations of traditional cultures and religions in the process of "verbalization," while placing no absolute trust in any of them.
- 東京大学文学部宗教学研究室,Department of Religious Studies. The University of Tokyo,東京大学の論文