ABORTION AND INFANTICIDE TOOLEY PDF
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.
|Country:||Saint Kitts and Nevis|
|Published (Last):||23 May 2007|
|PDF File Size:||19.17 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Is the argument sound? So they do not have a right to life.
Tooley argues that these alternative proposals are implausible. History of Western Philosophy. If This Is My Body …: Science Logic and Mathematics. Find it on Scholar. For example, suppose that I have become temporarily unconscious.
Paul Langham – – Southern Journal of Philosophy inanticide 4: Lack of desire due to temporary unconsciousness. No keywords specified fix it.
Heberlein – – American Journal of Bioethics 7 1: So he would deny 2 and infantickde. For example, suppose that I have become deeply, but temporarily, depressed and do not desire to live.
Devine – – Philosophy 58 A has a right to X only if A desires X or A lacks such a desire, but the lack of desire is due to toolye emotional imbalance, temporary unconsciousness, or brainwashing indoctrination, etc. What properties must an organism possess in order to be a person i. He denies that the fetus is a person. The rough idea here is just this: Sign in Create an account. Philosophy and Annd Affairs 2 1: Jeff McMahan – – Utilitas 19 2: Harris – – Journal of Medical Ethics 11 4: Xiaofei Liu – – Utilitas 24 1: Is the argument valid?
Lack of desire due to brainwashing or indoctrination. Card – – Bioethics 14 4: Sign in to use this feature. Abortion and infanticide are therefore morally permissible unless there are some other objections to these practices.
A Comment on Tooley’s Abortion and Infanticide. Jeffrey Reiman – – Journal of Social Philosophy 29 2: There is no morally significant difference between intentionally performing B and intentionally refraining from performing A. Added to PP index Total downloads 1, of 2, Recent downloads 6 months 35 11, of 2, How can I increase my downloads? These situations suggest the following qualification: It is clear that fetuses do not satisfy the SCR and, hence, do not have a right to life.
Lack of desire due to temporary psychological derangement. Tooley is, if an organism satisfies the SCR, does it follow that the organism is a person? Call this property P. Is this argument valid?
A comment on Tooley’s Abortion and Infanticide.
But is this claim plausible? The former is a descriptive term; the latter is a moral term. Tooley thinks this argument is unsound. Assume that A and B do infantjcide have any other consequences, and that E is the only morally significant outcome of process C.
Is satisfaction of the SCR a sufficient condition for personhood?
Tooley’s immodest proposal: Abortion and Infanticide.
For example, suppose that I have been brainwashed or indoctrinated infanticiide that I do not desire to live. This article has no associated abstract. But he does not defend this position in his paper. Abortion in Applied Ethics. Is this claim plausible? A key step in this argument is premise 3the claim that one has a right to X only if one desires X.