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.

Author: Gozuru Kiktilar
Country: Saint Kitts and Nevis
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Video
Published (Last): 23 May 2007
Pages: 439
PDF File Size: 19.17 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.23 Mb
ISBN: 602-8-82463-908-6
Downloads: 78556
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mobar

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.

Clarendon Press,Pp.