Three Errors in the Substance View's Defense

Abstract According to the theory of intrinsic value and moral standing known as the \substance view," all human beings have intrinsic value, full moral standing and, with these, a right to life. The substance view has been defended by numerous contemporary philosophers who use the theory to argue that the standard human fetus has a right to life and, ultimately, that abortion is prima facie seriously wrong. In this paper, I identify three important errors committed by some of these philosophers in their defense of the theory|what I refer to as the \extratheoretical-proposition error," \quantitative-differences error," and \non-normative-answer error"|and conclude that these errors render their defense inadequate.