Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Reply to Marquis: how things stand with the ‘future like ours’ argument
  1. Carson Strong
  1. Correspondence to Dr Carson Strong, Department of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 956 Court Avenue, Suite G212, Memphis, Tennessee 38163, USA; cstrong{at}uthsc.edu

Abstract

In an earlier essay in this journal I critiqued Don Marquis's well-known argument against abortion. I distinguished two versions of Marquis's argument, which I refer to as ‘the essence argument’ and ‘the sufficient condition argument’. I presented two counterexamples showing that the essence argument was mistaken, and I argued that the sufficient condition argument should be rejected because Marquis had not adequately responded to an important objection to it. In response to my critique, Marquis put forward in this journal a revised version of his argument. In his modified approach he no longer advocates the essence argument and he offers a new version of the sufficient condition argument. In the current essay, I discuss how Marquis's revised argument deals with my original objections, and I argue that his new sufficient condition argument is unsuccessful.

  • Abortion
  • killing
  • future like ours
  • future of value
  • Don Marquis
  • cloning
  • genetics
  • reproductive ethics
  • stem cells
  • neonatology

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

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

Linked Articles

  • The concise argument
    Guy Kahane

Other content recommended for you