Moral argument. Steps of an investigation process.
Abstract
Reception: October 15, 2015 Accepted: January 16, 2016 This paper outlines a research project whose goal is to inquire into the way in which people argue concerning decision-making when ethical dilemmas in medical practice arise. The aim is to compare, through empirical research, the common means of argumentation in that field.References
CRAEMER-RUEGENBERG, I. (1976). Lenguaje moral y moralidad. Buenos Aires: Alfa.
GILBERT, M. (1997) Coalescent Argumentation. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum.
GONZÁLEZ, A. (2012) La argumentación de dilemas morales en la práctica médica. Una aproximación filosófica. España: Editorial Académica Española.
PEREDA, C. (2010). “La argumentación en cuanto práctica”. En F. Leal, Introducción a la Teoría de la argumentación (pp. 47-60). Guadalajara: U. de G.
PEREDA, C. (1994a). Razón e incertidumbre. México: Siglo XXI.
PEREDA, C. (1994b). Vertigos Argumentales: Una ética de la disputa. Barcelona: Anthropos-UAM.
RUSS, J. (2001). Los métodos en filosofía. Madrid: Síntesis.
VEGA, L., y P. OLMOS. (2011). Compendio de Lógica, Argumentación y Retórica. Madrid: Trotta.
Once the text is accepted for publication in Quadripartita Ratio, the authors must sign two legal documents: the License of Use and the Declaration of Authorship.
With the License of Use, the authors agree to the publication and diffusion of their work (integration in databases, diffusion in our social media, possible reeditions, etc.). However, it authorizes the download, reproduction and distribution of all published content, as long as the content is not modified and the source is indicated (name of the journal, volume, number, pages and electronic address of the document).
With the Declaration of Authorship, the authors manifest that the work is theirs, original and unpublished.
