Article Text
Abstract
In an influential essay entitled Why abortion is wrong, Donald Marquis argues that killing actual persons is wrong because it unjustly deprives victims of their future; that the fetus has a future similar in morally relevant respects to the future lost by competent adult homicide victims, and that, as consequence, abortion is justifiable only in the same circumstances in which killing competent adult human beings is justifiable.1 The metaphysical claim implicit in the first premise, that actual persons have a future of value, is ambiguous. The Future Like Ours argument (FLO) would be valid if “future of value” were used consistently to mean either “potential future of value” or “self-represented future of value”, and FLO would be sound if one or the other interpretation supported both the moral claim and the metaphysical claim, but if, as I argue, any interpretation which makes the argument valid renders it unsound, then FLO must be rejected. Its apparent strength derives from equivocation on the concept of “a future of value”.
- Abortion
- Future Like Ours
- Donald Marquis
- potentiality
- pro-choice
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Mark T Brown, PhD, is Professor of Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin Colleges, Wausau, Wisconsin, USA.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Deprivations, futures and the wrongness of killing
- A future like ours revisited
- Reply to Di Nucci: why the counterexamples succeed
- Abortion: Strong’s counterexamples fail
- Reply to Marquis: how things stand with the ‘future like ours’ argument
- Strong's objections to the future of value account
- Abortion and human nature
- Abortion, embryo destruction and the future of value argument
- A critique of “the best secular argument against abortion”
- Savulescu’s objections to the future of value argument