The vulnerability as partner of the autonomy
Keywords:
Vulnerability. Autonomy. Power. Bioethics research.Abstract
Under an anthropological approach, this study tries to make an analysis of the relevance of the concept of vulnerability in bioethics field as well as its relation with autonomy. It inserts this subject under contemporary social and cultural context, where enthusiasm for power predominates, with difficulties to deal with vulnerability. It discusses the contusive presence of vulnerability in every human process. The article analyses some vulnerability matters in Kant is discourse of formal autonomy. It makes a conclusive reading about vulnerability in bioethics, establishing some of its basic concepts, their anthropological meanings as well as its reflective applications. It says that the consciousness of vulnerability is very important to foster the critical rationalism that supports autonomy. It is necessary to Latin-American bioethics to have autonomy discussed in a more dialectical way, and vulnerability is the other branch in this dialectics.
References
Harvey, D. The condition of postmodernity. An inquiry into the origin of cultural change. Oxford/Malden-MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 2000. Apud Touraine, A. Une nouveau paradigme. Pour comprende le monde d Ìaujourd Ìhui. Paris: Fayard, 2005.
Arendt, H. Condição humana. 5a ed. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Forense Universitária, 1991.
Lipowetsky, G & Charles, S. Les temps hypermodernes. Paris: Grasset, 2004.
Toffler, A. Powershift. As mudanças do poder. São Paulo: Record, 1995.
Beck, U. Risikogesellschaft: auf dem weg in eine andere moderne. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1986.
Hervé-Leger, D. Catholicisme, la fin d Ìun monde. Paris: Bayard, 2003. p. 158.
Banco Mundial. HIPC. In: http://www.worldbank.org/hipc/ (10 setembro 2006).
Santos, T. Do terror à esperança. Auge e declínio do neoliberalismo. Aparecida: Idéias & Letras, 2004. p. 19.
Beauchamp, TL. Who deserves autonomy, and whose autonomy deserves respect? In: Taylor, JS. (ed.). Personal Autonomy: new essays on personal autonomy and its role in contemporary moral philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2005, p. 310-329. (316: graus da autonomia).
Furrow, D. Ethics. Key concepts in philosophy. New York: Continuum, 2005. p. 20.
Taylor, J.S. (ed.). Op. cit, 2005.
Furrow, D. Op. cit. p. 24.
_______. Op. cit. p. 25.
Frankfurt, H. G. Identification and wholeheartedness. In: Schoeman, F. (ed.). Responsibility, character and the emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
Furrow, D.. Op. cit. p. 27.
Mackenzie, C & Stoljar; N (eds.). Relational autonomy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Forte, B. Um pelo outro: por uma ética da transcendência. São Paulo: Pau- linas, 2006. pp. 57-74.
Kant I. Die religion innerhalb der grenzen der blossen vernunft. Königs- berg, zweite vermeherte Auflage, bei Friedrich Nicolavius, 1794. p. 225. Apud Bruno Forte. Op. cit. p. 71.
Forte, B. Op. cit. p. 66.
Kant I. Op. cit. p. 99. Apud Bruno Forte. Op. cit. p. 71.
Forte, B. Op. cit. p. 71.
Anjos, MF. Rumos da liberdade em bioética: uma leitura teológica. In: Pessini, L, & Barchifontaine, CP. (orgs.). Bioética e longevidade humana. São Paulo: Loyola/ S.Camilo. 2006. p.129-140.
Oliveira, M. A. Desafios éticos da globalização. São Paulo: Paulinas, 2001. p. 110.
Winnberg, J. An aesthetics of vulnerability. New York: Coronet Books, 2003.
Brasil. Normas para pesquisa envolvendo seres humanos. Conselho Na- cional de Saúde 196/96. Ministério da Saúde. Conselho Nacional da Saúde. Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa. 2000.
Kahn, A & Lecourt, D. Bioéthique et liberté: entretien réalisé par Christian Godin. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 2004. p. 38.
__________________. Op. cit. p. 40.
