No one should be put off from reading Miles' Logik undMetaphysik bei Kant by his telling us that he is following the ‘phenomenological-philological method’ Heidegger practiced, as shown in his Phenomenological Interpretation of Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, his earliest work on Kant and his last to be published. I do not claim to understand Miles' conception of this method. Whatever it be, what Miles actually presents is a careful examination of a number of crucial passages in Kant's first Critique (...) in Kantian terms. From it even the most seasoned student of the Critique will find light. (shrink)

The National Conference of Catholic Bishops has argued for significant government involvement in health care in order to assure respect for what they regard as the right to health care. Critics charge that the bishops are wrong because health care is not a right. In this article, it is argued that these critics are correct in their claim that health care is not a right. However, it is also argued that the premise that health care is not a right does (...) not imply that the market is the most equitable and just system for providing health care. Natural law arguments in the tradition of Roman Catholic social teaching lead to the conclusion that a just and prosperous society has a moral obligation to provide health care even if there is no such right. Further, there are strong moral grounds for concluding that the bishops are correct in their claim that health care ought not to be considered a market commodity. It is argued that if health care ought not to be considered a commodity, then national health insurance is the best available alternative for fulfilling the social obligation to distribute health care resources justly and fairly at this time in American history. The bishops' case for government involvement can be made on the strength of the Catholic tradition in theological argumentation, independent of the claim that health care is a right. (shrink)

The introduction of conscience clauses after the 1973 US Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade allowed physicians and nurses to opt out of medical procedures, particularly abortions, to which they were morally opposed. In recent years pharmacists have requested the same consideration with regard to dispensing some medicines. This paper examines the pharmacists’ role and their professional and moral obligations to patients in the light of recent refusals by pharmacists to dispense oral contraceptives. A review of John Rawls’s concepts (...) of the “original position” and the “veil of ignorance”, along with consideration of the concept of compartmentalisation, are used to assess pharmacists’ requests and the moral and legal rights of patients to have their prescriptive needs met. (shrink)

This paper considers the research contribution of OCMS as reflected in the theses presented for higher degrees by its students. This does not therefore include the very significant research productivity of OCMS staff. The OCMS processes and procedures for admitting, supervising and examining research students are first reviewed. The statistical evidence relating to successful completions is then presented and analysed. The scope of the research undertaken is examined in relation to the stated aims of OCMS, and this leads to the (...) conclusion that in general these aims have been impressively met, both academically and in serving the needs of the worldwide Church. (shrink)