David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Bioethics 27 (5):263-70 (2013)
According to the theory of intrinsic value and moral standing called the ‘substance view,’ what makes it prima facie seriously wrong to kill adult human beings, human infants, and even human fetuses is the possession of the essential property of the basic capacity for rational moral agency – a capacity for rational moral agency in root form and thereby not remotely exercisable. In this critique, I cover three distinct reductio charges directed at the substance view's conclusion that human fetuses have the same intrinsic value and moral standing as adult human beings. After giving consideration to defenders of the substance view's replies to these charges, I then critique each of them, ultimately concluding that none is successful. Of course, in order to understand all of these things – the reductio charges, defenders of the substance view's replies to them, and my criticisms of their replies – one must have a better understanding of the substance view as well as its defense. Accordingly, I address the substance view's understanding of rational moral agency as well as present its defense.
|Keywords||potential animalism moral standing intrinsic value fetus rational moral agency substance view|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Rob Lovering (2013). The Substance View: A Critique. Bioethics 27 (5):263-70.
Eugene Mills (2013). Early Abortion and Personal Ontology. Acta Analytica 28 (1):19-30.
N. Nobis (2011). Abortion, Metaphysics and Morality: A Review of Francis Beckwith's Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice. [REVIEW] Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 36 (3):261-273.
Paul Shapiro (2006). Moral Agency in Other Animals. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 27 (4):357-373.
Inder S. Marwah (2013). What Nature Makes of Her: Kant's Gendered Metaphysics. Hypatia 28 (3):551-567.
Christina Van Dyke (2009). Not Properly a Person. Faith and Philosophy 26 (2):186-204.
Yoram Levy (2005). The Situational Context on the Nature of Political Philosophy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8 (5):535 - 556.
Lara Denis (2008). Animality and Agency: A Kantian Approach to Abortion. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (1):117-37.
Stephen Wilmot (2001). Corporate Moral Responsibility: What Can We Infer From Our Understanding of Organisations? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 30 (2):161 - 169.
Erasmus Mayr (2011). Understanding Human Agency. Oxford University Press.
Robert Boostrom (1998). The Student as Moral Agent. Journal of Moral Education 27 (2):179-190.
Iuliana Corina Vaida (2014). The Problem of Agency and the Problem of Accountability in Kant's Moral Philosophy. European Journal of Philosophy 22 (1):110-137.
S. Matthew Liao (2012). The Genetic Account of Moral Status: A Defense. Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (2):265-277.
Mark D. Linville (2000). A Defense of Human Dignity. Faith and Philosophy 17 (3):320-332.
Added to index2012-02-03
Total downloads259 ( #10,060 of 1,934,733 )
Recent downloads (6 months)39 ( #14,001 of 1,934,733 )
How can I increase my downloads?