Suppr超能文献

关于如何在堕胎辩论中解读未来的角色。

On how to interpret the role of the future within the abortion debate.

机构信息

University College Dublin, Ireland.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2009 Oct;35(10):651-2. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.031294.

Abstract

In a previous paper, I had argued that Strong's counterexamples to Marquis's argument against abortion-according to which terminating fetuses is wrong because it deprives them of a valuable future-fail either because they have no bearing on Marquis's argument or because they make unacceptable claims about what constitutes a valuable future. In this paper I respond to Strong's criticism of my argument according to which I fail to acknowledge that Marquis uses "future like ours" and "valuable future" interchangeably. I show that my argument does not rely on not acknowledging that "future like ours" and "valuable future" are interchangeable; and that, rather, it is exactly by replacing "future like ours" with "valuable future" that I construct my argument against Strong. I conclude with some remarks on how Marquis's concept of "future like ours" should be interpreted.

摘要

在之前的一篇论文中,我曾指出,斯特朗对马奎斯反对堕胎论点的反例——根据该论点,终止胎儿是错误的,因为这剥夺了他们有价值的未来——要么与马奎斯的论点无关,要么提出了关于构成有价值未来的不可接受的主张。在本文中,我回应了斯特朗对我论点的批评,即我没有承认马奎斯使用了“我们这样的未来”和“有价值的未来”这两个概念可以互换。我表明,我的论点并不依赖于不承认“我们这样的未来”和“有价值的未来”是可以互换的;相反,正是通过用“有价值的未来”来取代“我们这样的未来”,我构建了我对斯特朗的论点。最后,我对马奎斯的“我们这样的未来”概念应该如何解释发表了一些看法。

相似文献

1
On how to interpret the role of the future within the abortion debate.
J Med Ethics. 2009 Oct;35(10):651-2. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.031294.
2
Abortion: Strong's counterexamples fail.
J Med Ethics. 2009 May;35(5):304-5; discussion 326-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.028233.
3
A critique of "the best secular argument against abortion".
J Med Ethics. 2008 Oct;34(10):727-31. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.024646.
4
Boonin on the future-like-ours argument against abortion.
Bioethics. 2007 Jul;21(6):324-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00560.x.
5
The "future like ours" argument and human embryonic stem cell research.
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jun;34(6):417-21. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.023556.
6
Reply to Marquis: how things stand with the 'future like ours' argument.
J Med Ethics. 2012 Sep;38(9):567-9. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100419. Epub 2012 Apr 13.
7
A future like ours revisited.
J Med Ethics. 2002 Jun;28(3):192-5; discussion 202. doi: 10.1136/jme.28.3.192.
8
Avoiding the Personhood Issue: Abortion, Identity, and Marquis's 'Future-Like-Ours' Argument.
Bioethics. 2016 May;30(4):272-81. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12211. Epub 2015 Sep 30.
9
The Identity Objection to the future-like-ours argument.
Bioethics. 2019 Feb;33(2):287-293. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12546. Epub 2018 Nov 27.
10
Two puzzles for Marquis's conservative view on abortion.
Bioethics. 2006 Sep;20(5):264-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00503.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Broadening the future of value account of the wrongness of killing.
Med Health Care Philos. 2015 Nov;18(4):587-90. doi: 10.1007/s11019-014-9620-7.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验