The Principlism Debate: A Critical Overview
Abstract
Clouser and Gert's 'A Critique of Principlism' (1990) has ignited debate over the adequacy of substituting principlism for moral theory as a means for dealing with biomedical dilemmas. Clouser and Gert argue that this sort of substitution is not adequate to the task. I examine their argument in light of recent defences of principlism on this score, those of B. Andrew Lustig (1992), David Degrazia (1992), and Beauchamp and Childress (1994). I argue that both sides in the debate have assumed differing conceptions of a moral theory that virtually guarantee their respective conclusions. These differing conceptions are motivated by antecedent epistemological commitments. The present debate over principlism is therefore inconclusive. Future discussion should focus on the underlying epistemological issues.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The abstract principles and frameworks that have proliferated in AI ethics cannot be sufficient to address ethical issues in practice.
“The abstract principles and frameworks that have proliferated in AI ethics offer accessible ways in to ethical debates, but they cannot be sufficient to address ethical issues in practice [14].”
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The ethical use of artificial intelligence in human resource management: a decision-making framework
Bankins, S. (2021) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-021-09619-6 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
“Similarly, ethical assessments must also balance the trade-offs in meeting different ethical principles (Davis, 1995).”
BackgroundA principlist framework for cybersecurity ethics
Formosa, P., Wilson, M., & Richards, D. (2021) · Computers & Security · doi:10.1016/j.cose.2021.102382 · Cited by 105 · see citing works
“There is also debate about how many principles there should be and how those principles are justified ( Davis, 1995 ; Shea, 2020b ).”
BackgroundPrinciplism or narrative ethics: must we choose between them?
McCarthy, J. (2003) · Medical Humanities · doi:10.1136/mh.29.2.65 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Internal and External Standards for Medical Morality
Beauchamp, T. L. (2001) · The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine · doi:10.1076/jmep.26.6.601.2995 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Isbanner, S., O’Shaughnessy, P., Steel, D., Wilcock, S., & Carter, S. (2022) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/37611 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
In Defence of Principlism in AI Ethics and Governance
Seger, E. (2022) · Philosophy & Technology · doi:10.1007/s13347-022-00538-y · Cited by 37 · see citing works
“Nonmaleficence is not repeated to medical students because it is particularly profound or because 2 Also see Davis (1995). it outlines some instructions.”
BackgroundPublic health ethics: teaching survey and critical review
Kessel, A. S. (2003) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00140-5 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Consistency, Common Morality, and Reflective Equilibrium
Brand‐Ballard, J. (2003) · Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal · doi:10.1353/ken.2003.0018 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
“As Clouser (1995, p. 222) remarks, “the issues in dispute [between principlism and descriptivism] will not so much affect the actual decisions made in particular cases as they will give an account of how those decisions were made.””
BackgroundTowards Improving the Ethics of Ecological Research
Crozier, G. K. D., & Schulte‐Hostedde, A. I. (2014) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-014-9558-4 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
“For example, a Kantian deontologist will disagree with a Utilitarian consequentialist on matters of ethical theory, but by focusing on shared ethical principles, they can be expected to reach agreements on many practical issues that are significant for making real-life decisions (Davis 1995).”
BackgroundBeauchamp, T. L., & DeGrazia, D. (2004) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/1-4020-2127-5_3 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Elmer, J., Atkins, D. L., Daya, M. R., Rios, M. D., Fry, J. T., Henderson, C. M., Lewis‐Newby, M., Madrigal, V. N., Marco, C. A., Ornato, J. P., et al. (2025) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001371 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
A pluralist view of nursing ethics
McCarthy, J. (2006) · Nursing Philosophy · doi:10.1111/j.1466-769x.2006.00272.x · Cited by 24 · see citing works
“sonal (Clouser & Gert, 1990; DuBose et al ., 1994; Davis, 1995).”
Narrative Means to Humanistic Ends
Pullman, D., Bethune, C., & Duke, P. S. (2005) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1207/s15328015tlm1703_14 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
An ethical framework for the responsibilities of pharmacists when selling complementary medicines
Popattia, A. S., & Caze, A. L. (2020) · Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.07.002 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
A Sociological Analysis of Ethical Expertise
Emmerich, N. (2015) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244015590445 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“Furthermore, despite the supposed differences between them, applied ethics encompasses both “principlist approaches” as well as those that claim to be based in broader conceptions of our “common morality” (Beauchamp & Childress, 2009; Clouser & Gert, 1990; Davis, 1995; Gert, Culver, & Clouser, 1997, 2000; Green, Gert,…”
BackgroundThe Belmont Report doesn’t need reform, our moral imagination does
Serpico, K. (2024) · Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/17470161241235772 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“Broader critiques of Belmont arise from its principlist model (Clouser and Gert, 1990; Dale, 2023; Davis, 1995; Evans, 2000).”
A Model of Comparative Ethics Education for Social Workers
Pugh, G. L. (2016) · Journal of Social Work Education · doi:10.1080/10437797.2016.1243497 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“In contrast, the field medicine has established a powerful and well-used principle-based model (Davis, 1995; Levi, 1996; McCarthy, 2003).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA sociological analysis of ethical expertise: The case of bioethics
Emmerich, N. (2016) · Cogent Social Sciences · doi:10.1080/23311886.2016.1143599 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Resuscitation decisions are often not documented early enough
Davies, P. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1275 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Luna, D. S., Broer, I., Bilandzić, H., Taddicken, M., Schuller, B. W., & Bürger, M. (2025) · Public Understanding of Science · doi:10.1177/09636625251328854 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Study on environmental hazards is flawed
Moffatt, S. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1274 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
The ‘redefinition of death’ debate: Western concepts and western bioethics
Jones, S. F., & Kessel, A. S. (2001) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-001-0024-8 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Ethical issues in clinical practice: Cases and analyses
Antommaria, A. H. M., & Bale, J. F. (2002) · Seminars in Pediatric Neurology · doi:10.1053/spen.2002.30340 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
The practical need to challenge the status quo: New directions in bioethics
Cooley, D. (2020) · Ethics Medicine and Public Health · doi:10.1016/j.jemep.2020.100500 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
“Davis argues that those in favor of Principlism and those against it have very different definitions of what a moral theory is [3].”
Are ethical principles relative to time and place? A Star Wars perspective on the Alder Hey affair
Arcus, K. D., & Kessel, A. S. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7378.1493 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Openness with patients: a categorical imperative to correct an imbalance
Kessel, A. S., & Crawford, M. (1997) · Science and Engineering Ethics · doi:10.1007/s11948-997-0036-0 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Bioethics as a language game: probing the quality of moral guidance in principlism
Vest, M. (2025) · Metamedicine · doi:10.1007/s11017-025-09702-9 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
“For example, as principlist debates rounded the quarter century mark, Richard Davis [10] flagged core differences in 1995 between Beauchamp and Childress’ and Clouser and Gert’s “expectations for a ‘theory’” [10, p. 103–104].”
InfluentialBioethical Boundaries, Critiques of Current Paradigms, and the Importance of Transparency
Parker, J. C. (2021) · The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine · doi:10.1093/jmp/jhab042 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Incidence of hospital admission does not equal incidence of disease
Pobereskin, L. H. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1277 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Christian Bioethics in Europe: In Defense against Reductionist Influences from the United States
Schotsmans, P. T. (2009) · Christian bioethics Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality · doi:10.1093/cb/cbp003 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Hilton, J. M. N. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1271 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
The Secularization of Medicine
Carlin, N. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.001.0001 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Compassionate Principlism: Towards a Novel Alternative to Standard Principlism in Bioethics
Braus, A. J. (2024) · Journal of Bioethical Inquiry · doi:10.1007/s11673-024-10373-9 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“We cannot be certain, but the principles afford us the “highest level of certi-tude” we can have (Davis 1995, 439).”
Advance directives in the UK: legal, ethical, and practical considerations for doctors.
Kessel, A. S., & Meran, J. G. (1998) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 2 · see citing works
van Willigenburg, T. (1998) · Philosophical Explorations · doi:10.1080/10001998058538696 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Munthe, C. (2011) · The International library of ethics, law and technology · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1330-7_6 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Principlism, Uncodifiability, and the Problem of Specification
Furlan, T. J. (2024) · Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics · doi:10.1017/s0963180123000622 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Mugu, V. K., Carr, B., Khandelwal, A., Olson, M., Schupbach, J. C., Zietlow, J. M., Vu, T. N. D., Chan, A., Collura, C. A., & Schmitz, J. (2025) · JMIR Medical Informatics · doi:10.2196/77061 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
“Although these principles have been extensively criticized [19], debated [20], and defended [21], they nevertheless remain at the center of modern teaching and practice of medical ethics.”
Iltis, A. S. (2021) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2021.1915414 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Swisher, L. L. (2010) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20090348.ic · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Confidentiality may be overvalued
Kessel, A. S. (1998) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7124.56a
Trombetta, A., & Barbi, E. (2020) · Acta Paediatrica · doi:10.1111/apa.15721
Isbanner, S., O’Shaughnessy, P., Steel, D. G., Wilcock, S., & Carter, S. M. (2022) · doi:10.2196/preprints.37611
Pieper, I. J. (2022) · Queensland University of Technology · doi:10.5204/thesis.eprints.231386
Ethical Considerations in Collaborative Pediatric Kidney Care
Freeman, M. A., & Molitor, S. J. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64672-0_10
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.002.0009
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.003.0003
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.002.0004
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.002.0005
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.003.0002
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.003.0001
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.003.0005
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.002.0003
Carlin, N. S. (2025) · doi:10.1093/med/9780197574003.003.0004
The ethics of unlinked anonymous testing
Nicoll, A., Gill, N., Goldberg, D., & Peckham, C. S. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7244.1275/a
A proposal for more useful AI ethics: hierarchical principlism & the principle of compassion
Braus, A. J. (2026) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-025-00964-6 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Davis, R. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Davis, R. B.
- ORCID
- Davis, R. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Medicine and Philosophy
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1995-02-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 85-105
- ISSN
- 0360-5310 (ISSN-L)
- 1744-5019
- OpenAlex
- W2121289923
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 2.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
- Keywords
- principlism, moral theory, biomedical ethics, epistemological commitments, bioethical dilemmas, utilitarianism, deontology, consequentialism
- MeSH terms
- Bioethics, Decision Making, Ethics, Medical, Humans, Morals, Philosophy, Medical, Ethical Analysis, Principle-Based Ethics, Ethical Theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
