- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
A reply to Professor Seedhouse
Journal of Medical Ethics 25 (4):349-350 (1999)
Abstract
This brief reply gives a few references and clarifies some points in order to emphasize that a number of Professor Seedhouse's assertions are debatable and that his criticism of slovenly scholarship and his unbridled ad hominem argumentation are out of place and easily refutedAuthor's Profile
Other Versions
No versions found
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
‘You Don’t Know Where Your Interest Lies’: A Brief Reply to Professor Radi on his Remarks About Professor Córdoba and Gender Identity.Claudio Cormick - 2021 - Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 10 (4):7-16.
Against medical ethics: opening the can of worms.J. Cassell - 1998 - Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (1):8-17.
Professional ethics: reply to Professor Downie.Paul Sieghart - 1986 - Journal of Medical Ethics 12 (2):66-66.
I. mathematical modeling of election predictions: Final reply to professor Aubert.Herbert A. Simon - 1983 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 26 (2):231 – 232.
It's All Very Well for You to Talk! Situationally Disqualifying Ad Hominem Attacks.Erik C. W. Krabbe & Douglas Walton - 1993 - Informal Logic 15 (2).
A few words in reply to professor Moore's criticism of "anti-pragmatisme".Albert Schinz - 1909 - Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 6 (16):434-438.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-09-13
Downloads
67 (#327,291)
6 months
9 (#328,796)
2010-09-13
Downloads
67 (#327,291)
6 months
9 (#328,796)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Reason and value: making reasoning fit for practice.Michael Loughlin, Robyn Bluhm, Stephen Buetow, Ross E. G. Upshur, Maya J. Goldenberg, Kirstin Borgerson, Vikki Entwistle & Elselijn Kingma - 2012 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 18 (5):929-937.
Philosophy, ethics, medicine and health care: the urgent need for critical practice.Michael Loughlin, Ross E. G. Upshur, Maya J. Goldenberg, Robyn Bluhm & Kirstin Borgerson - 2010 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (2):249-259.
Arguments at cross-purposes: moral epistemology and medical ethics.M. Loughlin - 2002 - Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (1):28-32.
Camouflage is still no defence – another plea for a straight answer to the question 'what is bioethics?'.Michael Loughlin - 2004 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 10 (1):75-83.
References found in this work
Communication and the Evolution of Society.Jürgen Habermas - 1983 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 16 (2):130-136.
Against medical ethics: a response to Cassell.D. Seedhouse - 1998 - Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (1):13-17.
What If Euthanasia Were Legal? Introducing the Issue.M. P. Battin & T. J. Bole - 1993 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 18 (3):237-240.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-8567d8d854-f747c dc2