"normative debates" is a correct and usable term in written English.
It is typically used in academic or formal writing to describe discussions or arguments about what is considered culturally or morally acceptable or desirable. Example: The panelists engaged in heated normative debates about the role of technology in modern society. Some argued that it promotes connectivity and efficiency, while others expressed concerns about its impact on personal relationships and privacy.
For example, the metaethical debate might be rationally resolved in favor of the relativist, while the substantive normative debates cannot be resolved.
This would require showing that the dispute about the irresolvability of moral disagreements (a metaethical debate) can be rationally resolved in a way that fundamental moral disagreements (substantive normative debates) themselves cannot.
At the second workshop members of the PAG were able to contribute to normative debates around PI in health service research; consider the roles of service users in carrying out varying kinds of research and identify PI tensions and reconciliation.
In practice, this cultural component of decentralization may be expressed through normative debates surrounding, for example, the definition of the political community or the recognition of national pluralism through symbolic gestures or asymmetric territorial autonomy.
While it may be interesting and helpful to analyze such additional equity concerns in relation to proportional shortfall, such empirical work should coincide with normative debates regarding whether such additional (or alternative) concerns should be included in the decision-making process.
And while there is an urgent normative debate underlying this issue -- over whether the Constitution should evolve or stay static -- no one ought to be allowed to claim that the act of clubbing a live Constitution to death isn't activism.
As with many other concepts used in normative debate determining the exact boundaries of the concept is a contested issue.
The assumption that globalization could create a set of universal values which might unite the world in a global moral community lies at the core of the normative debate between communitarians and cosmopolitans.
Descriptive empirical studies in medical ethics restrict themselves to providing empirical knowledge on an ethical topic without further reference to or interaction with the normative debate.
In parallel to the normative debate, many socio-empirical studies have been conducted to gather experiences, preferences and views of patients, healthy research participants and further stakeholders.
However, there is scarcity of literature which connects the normative debate about justifications for different consent models with findings gained in empirical research.
