Animalism, Abortion, and a Future Like Ours

The Journal of Ethics 23 (3):317-332 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Marquis’ future-like-ours argument against the morality of abortion assumes animalism—a family of theories according to which we are animals. Such an assumption is theoretically useful for various reasons, e.g., because it provides the theoretical underpinning for a reply to the contraception-abstinence objection. However, the connection between the future-like-ours argument and one popular version of animalism can prove lethal to the former, or so I argue in this paper.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,667

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
2019-06-30

Downloads
220 (#121,061)

6 months
15 (#192,867)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Andrea Sauchelli
Lingnan University

Citations of this work

Animalism.Stephan Blatti - 2014 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Material Beings.Peter Van Inwagen - 1990 - Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Well-being and death.Ben Bradley - 2009 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Survival and identity.David Lewis - 1976 - In Amélie Rorty, The Identities of Persons. University of California Press. pp. 17-40.
Material Beings.Peter Van Inwagen - 1990 - Philosophy 67 (259):126-127.
Why abortion is immoral.Don Marquis - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202.

View all 56 references / Add more references