The Counterfactual Argument Against Abortion

IF 1.2 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Utilitas Pub Date : 2023-06-22 DOI:10.1017/s0953820823000092
Ryan Kulesa
{"title":"The Counterfactual Argument Against Abortion","authors":"Ryan Kulesa","doi":"10.1017/s0953820823000092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this article, I present a novel argument against abortion. In short, what makes it wrong to kill someone is that they are a counterfactual person; counterfactual persons are individuals such that, were they not killed, they would have been persons. My view accommodates two intuitions which many views concerning the wrongness of killing fail to account for: embryo rescue cases and the impermissibility of infanticide. The view avoids embryo rescue cases because embryos in the rescue scenarios are not counterfactual people: they are not counterfactual people because it is false to say that, were they not killed, they would have been persons. As a result, it does not follow from my account that there is a prohibition against allowing embryos to die. On the other hand, infants are counterfactual people: an infant is an individual such that, were she not killed, she would have been a person.","PeriodicalId":45896,"journal":{"name":"Utilitas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utilitas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0953820823000092","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, I present a novel argument against abortion. In short, what makes it wrong to kill someone is that they are a counterfactual person; counterfactual persons are individuals such that, were they not killed, they would have been persons. My view accommodates two intuitions which many views concerning the wrongness of killing fail to account for: embryo rescue cases and the impermissibility of infanticide. The view avoids embryo rescue cases because embryos in the rescue scenarios are not counterfactual people: they are not counterfactual people because it is false to say that, were they not killed, they would have been persons. As a result, it does not follow from my account that there is a prohibition against allowing embryos to die. On the other hand, infants are counterfactual people: an infant is an individual such that, were she not killed, she would have been a person.
反对堕胎的反事实论点
在这篇文章中,我提出了一个反对堕胎的新颖论点。简而言之,杀人是错误的,因为他们是一个反事实的人;反事实的人是这样的人,如果他们没有被杀,他们就会是人。我的观点包含了两种直觉,而许多关于杀害的错误性的观点都没有考虑到这两种直觉:胚胎抢救案件和不允许杀害婴儿。这种观点避免了胚胎救援案例,因为救援场景中的胚胎不是反事实的人:它们不是反事实人,因为说如果它们没有被杀死,它们就会是人是错误的。因此,根据我的说法,并没有禁止胚胎死亡。另一方面,婴儿是反事实的人:婴儿是一个个体,如果她没有被杀,她就会成为一个人。
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
Utilitas
Utilitas PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
43
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信