Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
2
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1986-9-18
|
| pubmed:commentsCorrections | |
| pubmed:keyword | |
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
E
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:month |
Jun
|
| pubmed:issn |
0306-6800
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
12
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
64-6
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2009-11-18
|
| pubmed:otherAbstract |
KIE: Downie comments on Sieghart's article, "Professions as the conscience of society" (Journal of Medical Ethics 1985 Sep; 11(3): 117-122). He charges that Sieghart is blurring empirical, conceptual, and moral claims when he contends that the professional relationship is unique in that "altruism is paramount and self-interest has no place." Downie holds that there is nothing to distinguish the doctor or lawyer from other occupations in terms of the criteria of self-interest and altruism. Likewise, these occupations have no nobler cause than those of the farmer or merchant. Because it is difficult, if not impossible, to provide necessary and sufficient criteria for defining a profession, the idea of a special "professional ethics" is a pernicious one that serves to protect professionals from public scrutiny. Sieghart briefly defends his earlier article, pointing out that it was addressed to practicing doctors and lawyers rather than to moral philosophers.
|
| pubmed:meshHeading | |
| pubmed:year |
1986
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Professional ethics.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|