Written in an accessible style, the authors immediately set out their agreements and differences. The philosopher (Prado) has confidence that theory will provide a reliable guide to most situations, and that only in theory can such universals be found. The clinical ethicist (Taylor) thinks that each situation is different, and that clinicians are often frustrated by the abstractions of theory when it comes to dealing with individual patients. The result is a blend of theoretical analysis and clinical "reality checks."

The authors conclude that theory can help clarify a problem but it cannot provide absolutes and that clinical practice without consideration of theory will lead to confusion, accusations of malpractice, and diminished humanity. They plead for a combination of the two approaches through training that would sensitize clinicians to the advantages of philosophical analysis and the importance of finding objective criteria to aid in assessing each case.