David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (6):577-593 (2008)
The debate over surgical abortion is certainly one of the most divisive in ethical discourse and for many it seems interminable. However, this paper argues that a primary reason for this is confusion with regard to what issues are actually under dispute. When looking at an entrenched and articulate figure on one side of the debate, Peter Singer, and comparing his views with those of his opponents, one finds that the disputed issue is actually quite a narrow one: the moral status of potential persons. Finding this common ground clears the conceptual space for a fruitful argument: the thesis of which is that most, including Singer, who argue that potential persons do not have full personal moral status fail to make the necessary distinction between natural potential (which confers moral status) and practical potential (which admittedly does not)
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Roy W. Perrett (2000). Taking Life and the Argument From Potentiality. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 24 (1):186–197.
Citations of this work BETA
A. E. Hinkley (2008). "How Are We Defining Our Terms Here?": The Defining the Semantic Meaning of Terms in Bioethical Debates. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (6):533-537.
Similar books and articles
Peter Singer (2008). Interview - Peter Singer. The Philosophers' Magazine 40 (40):59-60.
Helga Kuhse & Peter Singer (2009). Individuals, Humans, and Persons : The Issue of Moral Status. In John P. Lizza (ed.), Defining the Beginning and End of Life: Readings on Personal Identity and Bioethics. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Patrick A. Tully (2005). Victims of Abortion and “Victims” of Contraception. Journal of Philosophical Research 30:383-398.
A. Giubilini (2012). Abortion and the Argument From Potential: What We Owe to the Ones Who Might Exist. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 37 (1):49-59.
David DeGrazia (2008). Moral Status as a Matter of Degree? Southern Journal of Philosophy 46 (2):181-198.
Charles Christopher Camosy (2012). Peter Singer and Christian Ethics: Beyond Polarization. Cambridge University Press.
R. Jo Kornegay (2011). Hursthouse's Virtue Ethics and Abortion: Abortion Ethics Without Metaphysics? [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):51-71.
Daryl Pullman (2010). Human Non-Persons, Feticide, and the Erosion of Dignity. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):353-364.
Hon-Lam Li & Anthony Yeung (eds.) (2007). New Essays in Applied Ethics: Animal Rights, Personhood and the Ethics of Killing. Palgrave Macmillan.
Peter Singer (1999). Henry Spira's Search for Common Ground on Animal Testing. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (01):9-22.
Nancy (1993). The Abortion Debate: The Search for Common Ground, Part 1:Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community. Faye D. Ginsburg; Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes. Laurence H. Tribe. [REVIEW] Ethics 103 (3):516-.
Nancy (1993). The Abortion Debate: The Search for Common Ground, Part 2:Contested Lives: The Abortion Debate in an American Community Faye D. Ginsburg; Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes Laurence H. Tribe. Ethics 103 (4):731-.
Peter Singer (2009). Speciesism and Moral Status. Metaphilosophy 40 (3-4):567-581.
Added to index2010-09-14
Total downloads8 ( #165,573 of 1,096,906 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #164,383 of 1,096,906 )
How can I increase my downloads?