When I compair hermeneutics to the Tolstoyians it seems like a very odd thing to me.
“Tolstoy had a profound influence on the development of Christian anarchist thought. The Tolstoyans were a small Christian anarchist group formed by Tolstoy’s companion, Vladimir Chertkov (1854–1936), to spread Tolstoy’s religious teachings. Prince Peter Kropotkin wrote of Tolstoy in the article on anarchism in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica:
Without naming himself an anarchist, Leo Tolstoy, like his predecessors in the popular religious movements of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Chojecki, Denk and many others, took the anarchist position as regards the state and property rights, deducing his conclusions from the general spirit of the teachings of Jesus and from the necessary dictates of reason. With all the might of his talent he made (especially in The Kingdom of God is Within You) a powerful criticism of the church, the state and law altogether, and especially of the present property laws. He describes the state as the domination of the wicked ones, supported by brutal force. Robbers, he says, are far less dangerous than a well-organized government. He makes a searching criticism of the prejudices which are current now concerning the benefits conferred upon men by the church, the state and the existing distribution of property, and from the teachings of Jesus he deduces the rule of non-resistance and the absolute condemnation of all wars. His religious arguments are, however, so well combined with arguments borrowed from a dispassionate observation of the present evils, that the anarchist portions of his works appeal to the religious and the non-religious reader alike.”
On the other hand if we used purely utlitarian secular ideas about research we would quickly enter into world that quickly devloves.
The Nurenberg Trials tought researchers to relable the terminology and continued research in the vein of plausable denilability.
Eperimentation became an “investigation” or “observation”.
So this leads us to the idea of how to combine the Science and Religen or keep them seperate?
Another example I could use is the “intelligent design” idea. That seems to undermine both Science and Religen, rendering both sort of illegible to me.
Hermenteutics supports the relabling of research harms while Tolstoyian Christians would instantly condem it.Maybe that is a kind of litmus test.
Maybe after the Nurenberg Trials the relabeling was just a feel good method for Religen to rationalize the more dehumanizing aspects of Science?
Human subjects research is about these “ethics” but not actual law.
“Ethics” seems to be the circumvention around those recurrent Nurenberg issue probably extreme cases.