Abortion and Infanticide [Michael Tooley] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. This book has two main concerns. The first is to isolate the. text Michael Tooley’s recent book, Abortion and Infanticide Tooley advances his arguments for a liberal position with great so- phistication and in impressive. MICHAEL TOOLEY. Abortion and Infanticide’. This essay deals with the question of the morality of abortion and in- fanticide. The fundamental ethical objection.
|Published (Last):||10 April 2017|
|PDF File Size:||8.61 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.91 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Tooley’s “Abortion and Infanticide”
But is this claim plausible? The conclusion of this argument is the SCR. But we would still want to say that I have a right to life. No keywords specified fix it. Is this argument valid?
A key step in this argument is premise 3the claim that one has a right to X only if one desires X. Is this claim plausible? Devine – – Philosophy 58 He denies that the fetus is a person. Abortion and infanticide are therefore morally permissible unless there are some other objections to these tookey.
Sign in to use this feature. Tooley argues that these alternative proposals are implausible. Should Practical Reason Be Tabled? Jeff McMahan – – Utilitas 19 2: Paul Langham – – Southern Journal of Philosophy 17 4: Michael Tooley University of Colorado, Boulder.
We would still want to say that I have right to life. An organism has a right to life only if it possesses the concept of a self as a continuing subject of experiences and other mental states, and believes that it is itself such a continuing entity. An organism possesses a serious right to life only if it possesses the concept of a self as a continuing subject of experiences and other mental states, and believes that it is itself such a continuing entity. If an organism potentially possesses P, then the organism has a right to life now.
Heberlein – – American Journal of Bioethics 7 1: But he does not defend this position in his paper. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2 1: We would still want to say that I have a right to life even though I do not now desire to live. Philip Turner – – International Philosophical Quarterly 25 4: Harris – – Journal of Medical Ethics 11 4: That is, if an organism satisfies the SCR, does it follow that the organism is a person? Assume that A and B do not have any other consequences, and that E is the only morally significant outcome of process C.
So our treatment of many animals may be morally indefensible; we may be murdering innocent persons. Ethical Veganism, Virtue, and Greatness of the Soul. It is clear that fetuses do not satisfy the SCR and, hence, do not have a right to life.
There is some property or other, even if we do not know what it is, that adult humans possess and that endows them a right to life.
Tooley’s immodest proposal: Abortion and Infanticide.
If an organism does not satisfy the SCR, it is not a person. A has a right to X only if A desires X or A lacks such a desire, but the lack of desire is due abortionn temporary emotional imbalance, temporary unconsciousness, or brainwashing indoctrination, etc.
Lawrence Torcello – – Res Publica 15 1: Added to PP index Total downloads 1, of 2, Recent downloads 6 months 35 11, of 2, How can I infanticire my downloads? Infanticide and the Liberal View on Abortion.
History of Western Philosophy. Reply to Don Marquis’s “Reiman on Abortion”. Request removal from index.