Abortion: Why Bioethics Can Have No Answer – A Personal Perspective

Nursing Ethics 6 (1):47-57 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Abortion is one of the great moral debates of the epoch. Is there a rational method by which the debate can be resolved? Can bioethics' promise of such a method be fulfilled? Surely, a strictly rational approach can establish solid grounds for our beliefs once and for all. We would then be justified in deeming as unreasonable anyone who does not accept the perfectly rational conclusions. I present two scenarios to show that there can be no such philosophically grounded method and therefore no such facts to which everyone must agree. This does not mean that it is in fact impossible for people to reach agreement. It simply means that there is no incontrovertibly rational means by which they must do so

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 97,244

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-09

Downloads
33 (#542,933)

6 months
7 (#960,159)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The elimination of morality.Anne Maclean - 1993 - Reflections on Utilitarianism and Bioethics. London U. New York.
The morality of abortion.Paul Ramsey - 1968 - In Edward Shils (ed.), Life or death: ethics and options. Portland, Or.,: Reed College. pp. 60.
Causing Death and Saving Lives.E. Telfer - 1978 - Journal of Medical Ethics 4 (1):47-47.
Moral dilemmas in modern medicine.Michael Lockwood (ed.) - 1985 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Death, medicine & bioethics.Geoffrey Hunt - 1994 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (4).

Add more references