Forthcoming
Critical Notes

Between the Ideal and the Possible: On Lo ideal y lo no ideal en la bioética by Florencia Luna

PDF (Español (España))
  • Gustavo Ortiz Millán
Gustavo Ortiz Millán
Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, México.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36446/af.e1412

Published 2026-07-18

Keywords

  • Florencia Luna,
  • Bioética,
  • Teorías ideales,
  • Teorías no ideales,
  • Mecanismo decisorio de idealidad,
  • Metabioética
    • ...More
    Less
  • Florencia Luna,
  • Bioethics,
  • Ideal Theories,
  • Non-ideal Theories,
  • Decision-Making Mechanism of Ideality,
  • Metabioethics
    • ...More
    Less
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This text offers a critical reading of Lo ideal y lo no ideal en la bioética by Florencia Luna, situating her proposal within the classic debate between ideal theories (IT) and non-ideal theories (NIT) in ethics and political philosophy. After reconstructing the role of idealizations in philosophy, it shows how bioethics has oscillated between abstract normative frameworks and context-sensitive approaches such as casuistry, feminism, and global bioethics. The core of the analysis is Luna’s proposal of a “metabioethics” and a decision-making mechanism of ideality, based on five criteria (political feasibility, probable effectiveness, moral permissibility, priority of the most serious injustices, and long-term coherence), which avoids both rigid ideality and accommodating pragmatism. Drawing on cases such as research involving pregnant women in contexts where abortion is illegal, conscientious objection in healthcare, and vaccine distribution during the COVID pandemic, the text questions whether the IT/NIT distinction is always decisive, suggesting that the real normative work lies in the criteria themselves and in reflective equilibrium.

PDF (Español (España))

References

  1. Beauchamp, T., & Childress, J. (1979). Principles of biomedical ethics, Oxford University Press.
  2. Cohen, G. A. (2008). Rescuing justice and equality. Harvard University Press.
  3. Gilabert, P. (2017). Justice and feasibility: A dynamic approach. En M. Weber & K. Vallier (Eds.), Political utopias: Contemporary debates (pp. 95-126). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190280598.003.0006
  4. Hamlin, A., & Stemplowska, Z. (2012). Theory, ideal theory and the theory of ideals. Political Studies Review, 10(1), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9302.2011.00244.x
  5. Luna, F. (2026). Lo ideal y lo no ideal en la bioética: Decisiones en un mundo imperfecto. Editorial Universitaria de Buenos Aires-Sociedad Argentina de Análisis Filosófico. https://doi.org/10.36446/editorialsadaf.14
  6. Rawls, J. (1979). Teoría de la justicia. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  7. Rawls, J. (1993). Political liberalism. Columbia University Press.
  8. Robeyns, I. (2008). Ideal theory in theory and practice. Social Theory and Practice, 34(3), 341-462. https://doi.org/10.5840/soctheorpract200834321
  9. Valentini, L. (2012). Ideal vs. non-ideal theory: A conceptual map. Philosophy Compass, 7(9), 654-664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00500.x

Most read articles by the same author(s)