I take issue with Frank Leavitt's sketch of a pragmatic criterion for
the relevance of metaphysics to medical ethics. I argue that appeal to
the potential for confusion generated by metaphysical subtlety establ
ishes a need for better communication rather than shows philosophical
insight beside the point. I demonstrate that the proposed Criterion of
Relevance has absurd consequences, and I claim that the relevance of
philosophical doctrines, whether ethical or metaphysical, is best acco
unted for in terms of improved understanding.