From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization

Burak Küçük; Nurdan Kırımlıoğlu; Hilmi Özden

doi:10.31020/mutftd.1771942

Research Article

From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization

Year 2026, Volume: 16 Issue: 1, 268 - 281, 23.01.2026

Burak Küçük , Nurdan Kırımlıoğlu , Hilmi Özden

https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.1771942

Abstract

Aim: This study aims to examine the historical and ethical aspects of anatomy and animal experimentation in Western culture, focusing on the interplay between ethical principles and scientific inquiry.
Method: The study employed a descriptive historical analysis technique. From February to May 2025, a survey of scholarly literature on anatomy and ethics, spanning from antiquity to the present, was conducted to elucidate the historical connection between anatomical knowledge and ethical frameworks.
Findings: Anatomical research developed via morally controversial procedures, including human dissection and animal experimentation. Pioneering individuals like as Herophilos and Galen established early methodological principles, with Galen's perspectives on animal consciousness and suffering shaping Western medical philosophy for centuries. Religious ideologies and societal factors subsequently constrained anatomical research. In the 19th century, animal rights movements and discussions around dissection inspired legal reforms. In the 20th century, the 3R concept (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) and institutional ethics committees established institutionalized ethical monitoring. Currently, innovations like organ-on-a-chip illustrate the convergence of scientific advancement with ethical awareness.
Conclusion: The historical development of anatomical research demonstrates that ethical responsibility is crucial for the validity and durability of scientific knowledge. As scientific processes advance, their ethical frameworks must also adapt.

Keywords

Western Civilization , Anatomy , Medical History , Animal Research , Ethics

References

1. Jones DG. The body on display in Western culture: History, ethics and the aesthetics of anatomy. London: Routledge; 2016.
2. Carbone L. What animals want: Expertise and advocacy in laboratory animal welfare policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.
3. Russell WMS, Burch RL. The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen; 1959.
4. Hubrecht RC, Carter E. The 3Rs and humane experimental technique: Implementing change. Animals (Basel). 2019;9(10):754. doi:10.3390/ani9100754.
5. Bhatia SN, Ingber DE. Microfluidic organs-on-chips. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(8):760-72. doi:10.1038/nbt.2989.
6. Yıldırım A, Şimşek H. Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 12. baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık; 2021.
7. Bowen GA. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 2009;9(2):27–40, doi: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
8. Guerrini A. Experimenting with humans and animals: from Aristotle to CRISPR. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2022.
9. Altuğ T. Hayvan deneyleri etiği. Sağlık Bilimlerinde Süreli Yayıncılık. 2009; 53-68.
10. Çobanoğlu N, Aydoğdu İ. Tıp araştırmaları ve hayvan hakları açısından hayvan deneyleri etik kurulları. Sağlık Bilimlerinde Süreli Yayıncılık. 2009;12(62):5542-5553.
11. Ferdowsian HR, Beck N. Ethical and scientific considerations regarding animal testing and research. PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e24059. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0024059.
12. Balkan A, Balkan M. Legal requirements involving ethics in animal research, laboratory standardisation, and animal care. Turk Thorac J 2013;14(2):6-9 DOI: 10.5152/ttd.2013.44
13. Debernardi A, et al. Alcmaeon of croton. Neurosurgery. 2010;66(2):247-52. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000363193.24806.02
14. Whitehead AN. Process and Reality. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1951.
15. Green P. Alexander of Macedon, 356–323 BC: A historical biography. Vol. 11. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2013.
16. Gençay FDS. Hayvan deneyleri ve çevre hukukunda etik yaklaşımlar. Prof. Dr. Metin Günday Armağanı. Atılım Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 65; 2020. p.1213-1236.
17. Jones DG, Whitaker MI. Speaking for the dead: The human body in biology and medicine. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2012.
18. Ergün Y. Hayvan deneylerinde etik. Arşiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi. 2010;19(4):220-35.
19. von Staden H. Herophilus: The art of medicine in early Alexandria. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.
20. Longrigg J. Greek rational medicine: Philosophy and medicine from Alcmaeon to the Alexandrians. London: Routledge; 1993.
21. Nutton V. Ancient medicine. London: Routledge; 2004.
22. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 8th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019.
23. Porter R. The greatest benefit to mankind: A medical history of humanity. London: Norton; 1997.
24. Long AA. From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic and Roman philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
25. van der Eijk PJ. Galen, on semen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997.
26. Uludağ Ö. Hayvan deneyi çalışmalarında etik kuralların tarihçesi ve önemi. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2019;5(1):1401-13.
27. Franco NH. Animal experiments in biomedical research: A historical perspective. Animals (Basel). 2013;3(1):238-73. doi:10.3390/ani3010238.
28. Park K. The criminal and the saintly body: Autopsy and dissection in Renaissance Italy. Renaissance Q. 1995;47(1):1-33.
29. Siraisi NG. Avicenna in Renaissance Italy: The Canon and medical teaching in Italian universities after 1500. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1997.
30. Richardson R. Death, dissection and the destitute. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2001.
31. Wilson L. William Harvey’s prelectiones: The performance of the body in the Renaissance theater of anatomy. Representations. 1987;17:62-95. doi:10.2307/3043793.
32. Parent A. Berengario da Carpi and the renaissance of brain anatomy. Front Neuroanat. 2019;13:11. doi:10.3389/fnana.2019.00011.
33. O'Malley CD. Andreas Vesalius of Brussels, 1514-1564. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1964.
34. Benini A, Bonar SK. Andreas Vesalius: 1514-1564. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(11):1388-93.
35. Hau J, Schapiro SJ, Van Hoosier GL Jr. Handbook of laboratory animal science: Animal models. Vol. 2. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2002.
36. Uzel İ. Hayvan deneyleri etik yasası. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Ethics Law Hist. 1994;2(2):75-9.
37. Savaş T, Yurtman İY, Tölü C. Hayvan hakları ve hayvan refahı: Felsefi bakış-nesnel arayışlar. Hayvansal Üretim. 2009;50(1):1-9.
38. Mason G, Franks B. The ethics of animal research: An overview. ILAR J. 2012;53(3):315-24. doi:10.1093/ilar.53.3.315.
39. Bentham J. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New York: HarperCollins; 2009.
40. Levine RJ. Ethics and regulation of clinical research. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2011.
41. Bennett BT, Jennings M. The welfare of laboratory animals. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.
42. Harrison B. Animals and the state in nineteenth-century England. Engl Hist Rev. 1973;88(349):786-820.
43. Beers DL. For the prevention of cruelty: The history and legacy of animal rights activism in the United States. Athens: Ohio University Press; 2006.
44. Santoro L. Our history [İnternet]. American Anti-Vivisection Society; 2016 [cited 2025 Feb 8]. Available from: https://aavs.org/about-us/our-history/
45. Yeo EJ. Social motherhood and the sexual communion of labour in British social science, 1850-1950. Womens Hist Rev. 1992;1(1):63-87.
46. Robinson DH, Toledo AH. Historical development of modern anesthesia. J Invest Surg. 2012;25(3):141-9.
47. Grieder FB, Strandberg JD. The contribution of laboratory animals to medical progress–past, present, and future. In: Hau J, Van Hoosier GL Jr, editors. Handbook of laboratory animal science: Essential principles and practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2002. p. 1-11.
48. Hardouin-Fugier E. La protection de l’animal sous le nazisme. In: Hardouin-Fugier E, Reus E, Olivier D. Luc Ferry ou le rétablissement de l’ordre. Lyon: Tahin Party; 2002.
49. Knight A. The beginning of the end for chimpanzee experiments? Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2011;6(1):9. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-3-16.
50. Festing S, Wilkinson R. The ethics of animal research: Talking point on the use of animals in scientific research. EMBO Rep. 2007;8(6):526-30. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400993.
51. Tannenbaum J, Bennett BT. Russell and Burch’s 3Rs then and now: The need for clarity in definition and purpose. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2015;54(2):120-32.
52. Eşitli EA. Hukuka aykırı hayvan deneyleri. Hacettepe Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012;2(2):16-24.
53. Annas GJ, Grodin MA. The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992. 54. Seidelman WE. Mengele medicus: Medicine's Nazi heritage. Milbank Q. 1997;75(2):208-38.
55. European Commission. Setting out a roadmap for standardisation of organ-on-chip technology [İnternet]. 2021 [cited 2025 Feb 8]. Available from: https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/setting-out-roadmap-standardisation-organ-chip-technology-2025-01-13_en
56. Ingber DE. Human organs-on-chips for disease modelling, drug development and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Genet. 2022;23(8):467-91.
57. Hafferty FW. Into the valley: Death and the socialization of medical students. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2000.
58. Fischer MR, et al. Digital anatomy – the future of anatomy teaching? Ann Anat.2018; 218:120-7.

Diseksiyondan Biyoetiğe: Batı Uygarlığında Anatomik Bilginin Etik Serüveni

Year 2026, Volume: 16 Issue: 1, 268 - 281, 23.01.2026

Burak Küçük , Nurdan Kırımlıoğlu , Hilmi Özden

https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.1771942

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışma, batı uygarlığında anatomi ve hayvan deneylerinin tarihsel ve etik boyutlarını, etik değerler ile bilimsel araştırmalar arasındaki karşılıklı etkileşim çerçevesinde analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır.
Yöntem: Araştırmada betimleyici tarihsel analiz yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Şubat 2025-Mayıs 2025 tarihleri arasında, günümüze gelinceğe değin yayınlanmış anatomi ve etik konularını kapsayan bilimsel literatür taranarak, Antik dönemden başlayarak modern tıbbın güncel uygulamalarına kadar etik ve anatomik bilgi ilişkisi betimlenmiştir.
Bulgular: İnsan ve hayvan bedenleri üzerinde gerçekleştirilen anatomik çalışmalar tarih boyunca etik tartışmaların merkezinde yer almıştır. Antik çağdaki sistematik diseksiyonlar, Orta Çağ’daki dini yasaklarla kısıtlanmış; Rönesans’ta bilimsel yeniden doğuşla etik normlar esnetilmiştir. 19. yüzyılda kadavra temini yasaları etik standartların kurumsallaşmasını sağlarken, 20. yüzyılda deney hayvanları kullanımıyla birlikte 3R ilkesi bilimsel ve etik dengeyi sağlamıştır. Günümüzde ise organ-on-a-chip gibi teknolojiler etik hassasiyetlerle uyumlu yeni bilgi üretim yolları sunmaktadır.
Sonuç: Anatomi bilimi, etik sorumlulukların ve teknolojik yeniliklerin şekillendirdiği çok boyutlu bir alan olarak gelişimini sürdürmektedir. Bilimsel ilerleme, etik ilkelerle bütünleşerek insan ve hayvan yaşamına saygılı bilgi üretimini mümkün kılmaktadır. Bu çalışma, anatomik bilginin etik çerçevedeki dönüşümünü anlamada tarihsel perspektifin önemini vurgulamaktadır.

Keywords

Batı uygarlığı , Anatomi , Tıp tarihi , Hayvan araştırmaları , Etik

References

1. Jones DG. The body on display in Western culture: History, ethics and the aesthetics of anatomy. London: Routledge; 2016.
2. Carbone L. What animals want: Expertise and advocacy in laboratory animal welfare policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.
3. Russell WMS, Burch RL. The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen; 1959.
4. Hubrecht RC, Carter E. The 3Rs and humane experimental technique: Implementing change. Animals (Basel). 2019;9(10):754. doi:10.3390/ani9100754.
5. Bhatia SN, Ingber DE. Microfluidic organs-on-chips. Nat Biotechnol. 2014;32(8):760-72. doi:10.1038/nbt.2989.
6. Yıldırım A, Şimşek H. Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri. 12. baskı. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık; 2021.
7. Bowen GA. Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 2009;9(2):27–40, doi: https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
8. Guerrini A. Experimenting with humans and animals: from Aristotle to CRISPR. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 2022.
9. Altuğ T. Hayvan deneyleri etiği. Sağlık Bilimlerinde Süreli Yayıncılık. 2009; 53-68.
10. Çobanoğlu N, Aydoğdu İ. Tıp araştırmaları ve hayvan hakları açısından hayvan deneyleri etik kurulları. Sağlık Bilimlerinde Süreli Yayıncılık. 2009;12(62):5542-5553.
11. Ferdowsian HR, Beck N. Ethical and scientific considerations regarding animal testing and research. PLoS One. 2011;6(9):e24059. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0024059.
12. Balkan A, Balkan M. Legal requirements involving ethics in animal research, laboratory standardisation, and animal care. Turk Thorac J 2013;14(2):6-9 DOI: 10.5152/ttd.2013.44
13. Debernardi A, et al. Alcmaeon of croton. Neurosurgery. 2010;66(2):247-52. doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000363193.24806.02
14. Whitehead AN. Process and Reality. New York: Simon and Schuster; 1951.
15. Green P. Alexander of Macedon, 356–323 BC: A historical biography. Vol. 11. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2013.
16. Gençay FDS. Hayvan deneyleri ve çevre hukukunda etik yaklaşımlar. Prof. Dr. Metin Günday Armağanı. Atılım Üniversitesi Yayınları No: 65; 2020. p.1213-1236.
17. Jones DG, Whitaker MI. Speaking for the dead: The human body in biology and medicine. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2012.
18. Ergün Y. Hayvan deneylerinde etik. Arşiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi. 2010;19(4):220-35.
19. von Staden H. Herophilus: The art of medicine in early Alexandria. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.
20. Longrigg J. Greek rational medicine: Philosophy and medicine from Alcmaeon to the Alexandrians. London: Routledge; 1993.
21. Nutton V. Ancient medicine. London: Routledge; 2004.
22. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 8th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2019.
23. Porter R. The greatest benefit to mankind: A medical history of humanity. London: Norton; 1997.
24. Long AA. From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic and Roman philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
25. van der Eijk PJ. Galen, on semen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997.
26. Uludağ Ö. Hayvan deneyi çalışmalarında etik kuralların tarihçesi ve önemi. Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2019;5(1):1401-13.
27. Franco NH. Animal experiments in biomedical research: A historical perspective. Animals (Basel). 2013;3(1):238-73. doi:10.3390/ani3010238.
28. Park K. The criminal and the saintly body: Autopsy and dissection in Renaissance Italy. Renaissance Q. 1995;47(1):1-33.
29. Siraisi NG. Avicenna in Renaissance Italy: The Canon and medical teaching in Italian universities after 1500. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1997.
30. Richardson R. Death, dissection and the destitute. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2001.
31. Wilson L. William Harvey’s prelectiones: The performance of the body in the Renaissance theater of anatomy. Representations. 1987;17:62-95. doi:10.2307/3043793.
32. Parent A. Berengario da Carpi and the renaissance of brain anatomy. Front Neuroanat. 2019;13:11. doi:10.3389/fnana.2019.00011.
33. O'Malley CD. Andreas Vesalius of Brussels, 1514-1564. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1964.
34. Benini A, Bonar SK. Andreas Vesalius: 1514-1564. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(11):1388-93.
35. Hau J, Schapiro SJ, Van Hoosier GL Jr. Handbook of laboratory animal science: Animal models. Vol. 2. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2002.
36. Uzel İ. Hayvan deneyleri etik yasası. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Ethics Law Hist. 1994;2(2):75-9.
37. Savaş T, Yurtman İY, Tölü C. Hayvan hakları ve hayvan refahı: Felsefi bakış-nesnel arayışlar. Hayvansal Üretim. 2009;50(1):1-9.
38. Mason G, Franks B. The ethics of animal research: An overview. ILAR J. 2012;53(3):315-24. doi:10.1093/ilar.53.3.315.
39. Bentham J. An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. New York: HarperCollins; 2009.
40. Levine RJ. Ethics and regulation of clinical research. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2011.
41. Bennett BT, Jennings M. The welfare of laboratory animals. Dordrecht: Springer; 2013.
42. Harrison B. Animals and the state in nineteenth-century England. Engl Hist Rev. 1973;88(349):786-820.
43. Beers DL. For the prevention of cruelty: The history and legacy of animal rights activism in the United States. Athens: Ohio University Press; 2006.
44. Santoro L. Our history [İnternet]. American Anti-Vivisection Society; 2016 [cited 2025 Feb 8]. Available from: https://aavs.org/about-us/our-history/
45. Yeo EJ. Social motherhood and the sexual communion of labour in British social science, 1850-1950. Womens Hist Rev. 1992;1(1):63-87.
46. Robinson DH, Toledo AH. Historical development of modern anesthesia. J Invest Surg. 2012;25(3):141-9.
47. Grieder FB, Strandberg JD. The contribution of laboratory animals to medical progress–past, present, and future. In: Hau J, Van Hoosier GL Jr, editors. Handbook of laboratory animal science: Essential principles and practices. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2002. p. 1-11.
48. Hardouin-Fugier E. La protection de l’animal sous le nazisme. In: Hardouin-Fugier E, Reus E, Olivier D. Luc Ferry ou le rétablissement de l’ordre. Lyon: Tahin Party; 2002.
49. Knight A. The beginning of the end for chimpanzee experiments? Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2011;6(1):9. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-3-16.
50. Festing S, Wilkinson R. The ethics of animal research: Talking point on the use of animals in scientific research. EMBO Rep. 2007;8(6):526-30. doi: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400993.
51. Tannenbaum J, Bennett BT. Russell and Burch’s 3Rs then and now: The need for clarity in definition and purpose. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2015;54(2):120-32.
52. Eşitli EA. Hukuka aykırı hayvan deneyleri. Hacettepe Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012;2(2):16-24.
53. Annas GJ, Grodin MA. The Nazi doctors and the Nuremberg code. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992. 54. Seidelman WE. Mengele medicus: Medicine's Nazi heritage. Milbank Q. 1997;75(2):208-38.
55. European Commission. Setting out a roadmap for standardisation of organ-on-chip technology [İnternet]. 2021 [cited 2025 Feb 8]. Available from: https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/setting-out-roadmap-standardisation-organ-chip-technology-2025-01-13_en
56. Ingber DE. Human organs-on-chips for disease modelling, drug development and personalized medicine. Nat Rev Genet. 2022;23(8):467-91.
57. Hafferty FW. Into the valley: Death and the socialization of medical students. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2000.
58. Fischer MR, et al. Digital anatomy – the future of anatomy teaching? Ann Anat.2018; 218:120-7.

There are 57 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language	English
Subjects	Health Promotion, Medical Education
Journal Section	Research Article
Authors	Burak Küçük 0000-0002-0162-4742 Nurdan Kırımlıoğlu 0000-0003-3156-6616 Hilmi Özden 0000-0003-2466-2757
Submission Date	August 25, 2025
Acceptance Date	January 5, 2026
Publication Date	January 23, 2026
Published in Issue	Year 2026 Volume: 16 Issue: 1

Cite

APA	Küçük, B., Kırımlıoğlu, N., & Özden, H. (2026). From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi Ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi, 16(1), 268-281. https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.1771942
AMA	Küçük B, Kırımlıoğlu N, Özden H. From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi. January 2026;16(1):268-281. doi:10.31020/mutftd.1771942
Chicago	Küçük, Burak, Nurdan Kırımlıoğlu, and Hilmi Özden. “From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization”. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi Ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi 16, no. 1 (January 2026): 268-81. https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.1771942.
EndNote	Küçük B, Kırımlıoğlu N, Özden H (January 1, 2026) From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi 16 1 268–281.
IEEE	B. Küçük, N. Kırımlıoğlu, and H. Özden, “From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization”, Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 268–281, 2026, doi: 10.31020/mutftd.1771942.
ISNAD	Küçük, Burak et al. “From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization”. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi 16/1 (January2026), 268-281. https://doi.org/10.31020/mutftd.1771942.
JAMA	Küçük B, Kırımlıoğlu N, Özden H. From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi. 2026;16:268–281.
MLA	Küçük, Burak et al. “From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization”. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi Ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi, vol. 16, no. 1, 2026, pp. 268-81, doi:10.31020/mutftd.1771942.
Vancouver	Küçük B, Kırımlıoğlu N, Özden H. From Dissection to Bioethics: The Ethical Adventure of Anatomical Knowledge in Western Civilization. Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Lokman Hekim Tıp Tarihi ve Folklorik Tıp Dergisi. 2026;16(1):268-81.

Article Files

Full Text

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

Periodical scientific publication of Mersin University School of Medicine. Can not be cited without reference. Responsibility of the articles belong to the authors

Cover

Ayşegül Tuğuz

from composition of İlter Uzel named “Dioscorides and his Student

Address

Mersin Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Tıp Tarihi ve Etik Anabilim Dalı Çiftlikköy Kampüsü

Yenişehir / Mersin