rss
J Med Ethics 2009;35:651-652 doi:10.1136/jme.2009.031294
  • Response

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

  1. E Di Nucci
  1. Correspondence to Dr E Di Nucci, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland; ezio.dinucci{at}ucd.ie
  • Received 26 May 2009
  • Accepted 27 May 2009

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.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.