Ken Himma argues that a human being becomes a moral person at the commencement of brain activity. In response to Himma, the author offers (1) brief comments on Himma’s project, (2) an alternative account of the human person that maintains that a human being is a human person by nature as long as it exists, and (3) a counterexample to Himma’s position that shows it cannot account for the wrongness of the purposeful creation of anencephalic-like children. The author concludes with replies to two challenges to his position.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Other content recommended for you
- Is a consensus possible on stem cell research? Moral and political obstacles
- A future like ours revisited
- A dualist analysis of abortion: personhood and the concept of self qua experiential subject
- Why should the baby live? Human right to life and the precautionary principle
- Savulescu’s objections to the future of value argument
- After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?
- Cursed lamp: the problem of spontaneous abortion
- Is there a ‘new ethics of abortion’?
- Philosophy, critical thinking and ‘after-birth abortion: why should the baby live?’
- A Moorean argument for the full moral status of those with profound intellectual disability