Bioética e modernidade: entre o cativeiro da razão e a construção dos direitos humanos

• Ano de defesa: 2013
• Autor(a) principal: Leite, Taylisi de Souza Corrêa [UNESP]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
• Palavras-chave em Português: Bioetica; Direito e biologia; Direitos humanos; Ciencia e etica; Materialismo historico; Frankfurt, Escola de sociologia de; Law
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/110453

Bioethics is object of this study as a contemporary phenomenon, from a philosophical look that diagnoses the bioethical problems as outgrowths of a specific rationality, which has its aegis in early modern times, with the Cartesian method, its peak the Enlightenment and develops as positivistic scientism and technology until current days. The issues arising from advances in biotechnology, environmental pollution and the scarcity of medical treatments for disadvantaged populations is identified as a necessary result of a mythologized reason, totalitarian, perverted and autopoietic, servant of the capitalist economic system. For the preparation of these statements this study comes from historical materialism dialectical epistemology as fundamental, and it has, in the first generation of the Frankfurt School, its main theoretical framework. This will be collated with the thought of other authors consistently, without the fundamental epistemic axis deviation. For this, all the way, not lost sight of why capitalism is necessarily intertwined as major foundations of modernity, and that any criticism of modern science can not ignore that it is one more process of capital production. Besides the correlation between bioethical problems and enlightened reason, this work covers the relationship between reason and medicine, as well as between reason and law, both tecnicized by positivism in service of capital. Looking some structures of medicine, the study seeks to highlight the difficulty of building a practical bioethics. In launching his gaze on modern law, the work shows that the biolaw is the worst way to split bioethics. Finally, in the hope of a possible proposal bioethics, the work makes a bridge between this and human rights, through the redemption of a dialectical reason, reflective and emancipatory, and multiculturalism