The parenthood argument

Don Marquis is well known for his future like ours theory (FLO), according to which the killing beings like us is seriously morally wrong because it deprives us of a future we can value. According to Marquis, human fetuses possess a future they can come to value, and thus according to FLO have a rig...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Simkulet, William (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Lade...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Veröffentlicht: Wiley-Blackwell [2018]
In: Bioethics
Jahr: 2018, Band: 32, Heft: 1, Seiten: 10-15
IxTheo Notationen:NCB Individualethik
NCH Medizinische Ethik
weitere Schlagwörter:B future like ours view
B parenthood argument
B Judith Jarvis Thomson
B deprivation view
B Don Marquis
B parental obligations
B Abortion
Online Zugang: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Don Marquis is well known for his future like ours theory (FLO), according to which the killing beings like us is seriously morally wrong because it deprives us of a future we can value. According to Marquis, human fetuses possess a future they can come to value, and thus according to FLO have a right to life. Recently Mark Brown has argued that even if FLO shows fetuses have a right to life, it fails to show that fetuses have a right to use their mother's body, evoking Judith Jarvis Thomson's famous violinist case. In the wake of Brown's conclusion, Marquis presents a new argument—the parenthood argument (PA)—which he believes shows that abortion is seriously morally wrong. Here I argue that the PA fails to show abortion is seriously morally wrong for the same reasons FLO fails to show abortion is seriously morally wrong.
ISSN:1467-8519
Enthält:Enthalten in: Bioethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12409