TY - JOUR T1 - Against medical ethics: opening the can of worms. JF - Journal of Medical Ethics JO - J Med Ethics SP - 8 LP - 17 DO - 10.1136/jme.24.1.8 VL - 24 IS - 1 AU - J Cassell Y1 - 1998/02/01 UR - http://jme.bmj.com/content/24/1/8.abstract N2 - In a controversial paper, David Seedhouse argues that medical ethics is not and cannot be a distinct discipline with it own field of study. He derives this claim from a characterization of ethics, which he states but does not defend. He claims further that the project of medical ethics as it exists and of moral philosophy do not overlap. I show that Seedhouse's views on ethics have wide implications which he does not declare, and in the light of this argue that Seedhouse owes us a defence of his characterization of ethics. Further, I show that his characterization of ethics, which he uses to attack medical ethics, is a committed position within moral philosophy. As a consequence of this, it does not allow the relation between moral philosophy and medical ethics to be discussed without prejudice to its outcome. Finally, I explore the relation between Seedhouse's position and naturalism, and its implications for medical epistemology. I argue that this shows us that Seedhouse's position, if it can be defended, is likely to lead to a fruitful and important line of inquiry which reconnects philosophy and medical ethics. ER -