The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy
Open accessAbstract
Conclusions and Recommendations, are particularly interesting in view of the controversies aroused by the Warnock Report.Many of the recommendations contained here are similar to Warnock's (for example, concerning the legitimacy of AID children, the need for a licensing authority to supervise the work of AID and IVF centres, etc), but others are at odds with the corresponding Warnock recommendations.In general, the authors place higher value on the family as an institution than did the Warnock Committee and display a much livelier awareness of the possible social dangers of the new techniques.One weakness of the book is that since its authors are approaching these topics from the standpoint of social scientists, their recommendations for legislative action -which surely must be based on properly ethical considerations, not merely sociological onesseem devoid of any satisfactory rational support.For example, they concede that experimentation on human embryos is an objectionable practice, since 'the material acting as the subject of the experimentation is a human being at the beginning of its individual development' (p 178); but the practical recommendation which they make concerning this practice is disappointingly feeble:
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Foot, P. (2001) · doi:10.1093/0198235089.001.0001 · Cited by 1,356
Value from hedonic experience and engagement
Higgins, E. T. (2006) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.113.3.439 · Cited by 949
Responsibility for Attitudes: Activity and Passivity in Mental Life
Smith, A. M. (2005) · Ethics · doi:10.1086/426957 · Cited by 894
The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, and Global
Held, V. (2005) · doi:10.1093/0195180992.001.0001 · Cited by 615
Ethical character and virtue of organizations: an empirical assessment and strategic implications
Chun, R. (2005) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-004-6591-2 · Cited by 234
Metadata
- Authors
- Downie, R. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Medical Ethics
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1986-09
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 165-165
- ISSN
- 0306-6800 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-4257
- OpenAlex
- W2039187089
- Cited by
- 1,569
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jme.12.3.165
- The paper
- Downie, R. S. (1986). Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. Journal of Medical Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.12.3.165
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.