堕胎不一致性论证的道德意义。
The Moral Significance of Abortion Inconsistency Arguments.
作者信息
Simkulet William
机构信息
Park University, Parkville, MO USA.
Dodge City Community College, Dodge City, KS USA.
出版信息
Asian Bioeth Rev. 2021 Oct 29;14(1):41-56. doi: 10.1007/s41649-021-00189-9. eCollection 2022 Jan.
Most opponents of abortion (OA) believe fetuses . Critics argue that OA act inconsistently with regards to fetal life, seeking to restrict access to induced abortion, but largely ignoring spontaneous abortion and the creation of surplus embryos by IVF. Nicholas Colgrove, Bruce Blackshaw, and Daniel Rodger call such arguments and contend they do not They present three objections to these arguments - the other beliefs, other actions, and hypocrisy objection. Previously, I argued these objections fail and threaten to undermine ethical inquiry. Colgrove et al. have recently replied, but here, I argue their reply fails as well and raises a new criticism of the other actions' objection. This essay sets out to show, as well as any philosophical argument can, that inconsistency arguments are morally significant.
大多数堕胎反对者（OA）认为胎儿……批评者认为，OA在胎儿生命问题上的行为不一致，试图限制人工流产的获取途径，但很大程度上忽视了自然流产以及体外受精产生的多余胚胎。尼古拉斯·科尔格罗夫、布鲁斯·布莱克肖和丹尼尔·罗杰称这类论点……并认为它们并非……他们对这些论点提出了三点反对意见——其他信念、其他行为以及伪善反对意见。此前，我认为这些反对意见是站不住脚的，且有可能破坏伦理探究。科尔格罗夫等人最近做出了回应，但在此，我认为他们的回应同样失败，并对其他行为的反对意见提出了新的批评。本文旨在尽可能通过哲学论证表明，不一致性论证在道德上具有重要意义。
Zotero 插件