Richard E. Flathman

Power, Authority, and Rights in the Practice of Medicine

Power, authority, and rights are edgy, adversarial notions. They come into play primarily where there is disagreement and incipient or at least latent conflict. Exploring these somewhat contentious ideas (whose home ground of politics is an arena in which we expect contention) in the context of the practice of medicine might seem marginal if not alien. The argument of this essay is that an image of a kind of constrained disputation or conflict — an image at once suggested by and conducive to the use of “power”, “authority”, and “rights” — is in fact appropriate to much of current medical practice. As might be expected of a political theorist, this argument will be presented in part through models and analogies familiar from political thought and practice. But the matters before us are sensitive. For this and more specifically analytical reasons that will emerge as we proceed, it will be well to seek perspective by first giving attention to the venerable and apparently more comfortable notion that medicine forms a practice.

Wittgenstein and the social sciences: critical reflections concerning Peter Winch’s interpretations and appropriations of Wittgenstein’s thought

Drawing heavily on Wittgenstein, Winch’s The Idea of a Social Science advanced a forceful and still valuable critique of positivist/empiricist conceptions of social science. In its more self-confident assertions concerning the nature of philosophy and society, however, Winch failed to recognize Wittgenstein’s acknowledgement of and appreciation for the indeterminacy and unsettled character of social and moral life.

The Rights of Volunteers

What rights should volunteers have? I will begin by interpreting this question as the query whether volunteers simply as such should have certain rights: whether the status and role of a volunteer is a sufficient condition of, an adequate entitlement for, at least some rights. An affirmative answer to the question so interpreted would not only have virtues philosophers prize, that is great generality and even a weak kind of necessity, but the great practical advantage of providing guidance across the whole range of volunteering. I find that I have to argue, with one possible exception that I will take up by way of concluding, that no such answer can be given. But interpreting the question in this way is provocative and examining it will take us into some of the important issues in the theory of rights. It may also shed some light

In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument

In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument. Collected essays by Bernard Williams, edited by Geoffrey Hawthorn. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005. 196p.

In and out of the ethical: The realist liberalism of Bernard Williams

29.95. As the editor reminds us, until the early eighties Bernard Williamss very strong reputation was primarily as a moral philosopher (albeit he also contributed valuable work in epistemology). It was clear, however, that his views had important implications for politics and political theory (no more so than in the superb essay “The Idea of Equality,” the one earlier essay reprinted in this collection). And beginning in the eighties, perhaps influenced by his friendship with Isaiah Berlin and the influence of the latter upon his thinking, Williams focused his thinking increasingly both on quite practical politics and on major issues in political theory. His interest in moral questions never waned, but his reflections concerning them almost always made connections to political and/or political theoretical issues.