Mapping Moral Injury: Comparing Discourses of Moral Harm

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216275%3A25210%2F19%3A39915136" target="_blank" >RIV/00216275:25210/19:39915136 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://academic.oup.com/jmp/article-abstract/44/2/175/5381982?redirectedFrom=fulltext" target="_blank" >https://academic.oup.com/jmp/article-abstract/44/2/175/5381982?redirectedFrom=fulltext</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhy042" target="_blank" >10.1093/jmp/jhy042</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Mapping Moral Injury: Comparing Discourses of Moral Harm

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Moral injury is a term whose popularity has grown in psychology and psychiatry, as well as philosophy, over the last several years. This presents challenges, because these fields use the term in different ways and draw their understanding from different sources, creating the potential for contradiction. This, however, is also an opportunity. Comparison between behavioral sciences and philosophy can help enrich understandings of harms considered not just psychological but moral. To this end, I provide an overview of the more influential writing of moral injury, mapping them into three broad discourses: clinical, juridical-critical, and structural. This overview then leads to a discussion of how comparative engagement among these discourses promises to expand on current theories of moral harm. I argue that such a comparison will demonstrate that more emphasis on structural violence will strengthen current understandings of moral injury, often understood in a more narrow sense to be a result of more direct, physical violence, allowing us to view moral injury as a result of institutional and social violence and injustices.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Mapping Moral Injury: Comparing Discourses of Moral Harm

Popis výsledku anglicky

Moral injury is a term whose popularity has grown in psychology and psychiatry, as well as philosophy, over the last several years. This presents challenges, because these fields use the term in different ways and draw their understanding from different sources, creating the potential for contradiction. This, however, is also an opportunity. Comparison between behavioral sciences and philosophy can help enrich understandings of harms considered not just psychological but moral. To this end, I provide an overview of the more influential writing of moral injury, mapping them into three broad discourses: clinical, juridical-critical, and structural. This overview then leads to a discussion of how comparative engagement among these discourses promises to expand on current theories of moral harm. I argue that such a comparison will demonstrate that more emphasis on structural violence will strengthen current understandings of moral injury, often understood in a more narrow sense to be a result of more direct, physical violence, allowing us to view moral injury as a result of institutional and social violence and injustices.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60302 - Ethics (except ethics related to specific subfields)

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/EF15_003%2F0000425" target="_blank" >EF15_003/0000425: Centrum pro etiku</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy

ISSN

0360-5310

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

44

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

17

Strana od-do

175-191

Kód UT WoS článku

000471308500003

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85062966544