Classic Pro-Choice Thought Experiments and African Communitarianism.

IF 1.7 2区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Bioethics Pub Date : 2025-07-16 DOI:10.1111/bioe.70016
Kirk Lougheed
{"title":"Classic Pro-Choice Thought Experiments and African Communitarianism.","authors":"Kirk Lougheed","doi":"10.1111/bioe.70016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>I analyse two classic pro-choice thought experiments in the Anglo-American philosophical literature in Thomson's Violinist Case and Tooley's Kitten Serum Case, in light of two prominent African normative theories. Though each of these cases is designed to generate pro-choice intuitions, I suggest they do not do so nearly as clearly when African normative theories are in view. Furthermore, even where they might yield a pro-choice verdict, they do so for very different reasons. That African ethics, which is often labelled communitarian, differs from what one typically finds in the Anglo-American normative tradition is hardly a new insight. However, that these differences might undermine the universality of pro-choice thought experiments about abortion in Anglo-American bioethics has yet to receive significant attention.</p>","PeriodicalId":55379,"journal":{"name":"Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I analyse two classic pro-choice thought experiments in the Anglo-American philosophical literature in Thomson's Violinist Case and Tooley's Kitten Serum Case, in light of two prominent African normative theories. Though each of these cases is designed to generate pro-choice intuitions, I suggest they do not do so nearly as clearly when African normative theories are in view. Furthermore, even where they might yield a pro-choice verdict, they do so for very different reasons. That African ethics, which is often labelled communitarian, differs from what one typically finds in the Anglo-American normative tradition is hardly a new insight. However, that these differences might undermine the universality of pro-choice thought experiments about abortion in Anglo-American bioethics has yet to receive significant attention.

经典的支持堕胎的思想实验和非洲的社群主义。
根据两个著名的非洲规范理论,我分析了英美哲学文献中两个经典的支持选择的思想实验:汤姆森的小提琴家案例和托雷的小猫血清案例。虽然这些案例中的每一个都是为了产生支持选择的直觉,但我认为,当非洲规范理论出现时,它们的作用就不那么明显了。此外,即使他们可能会做出支持堕胎的判决,他们这样做的原因也非常不同。经常被贴上社群主义标签的非洲伦理不同于典型的英美规范传统,这很难说是什么新见解。然而,这些差异可能会破坏英美生物伦理学中关于堕胎的支持选择的思想实验的普遍性,这一点尚未得到重大关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bioethics
Bioethics 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
127
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: As medical technology continues to develop, the subject of bioethics has an ever increasing practical relevance for all those working in philosophy, medicine, law, sociology, public policy, education and related fields. Bioethics provides a forum for well-argued articles on the ethical questions raised by current issues such as: international collaborative clinical research in developing countries; public health; infectious disease; AIDS; managed care; genomics and stem cell research. These questions are considered in relation to concrete ethical, legal and policy problems, or in terms of the fundamental concepts, principles and theories used in discussions of such problems. Bioethics also features regular Background Briefings on important current debates in the field. These feature articles provide excellent material for bioethics scholars, teachers and students alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信