Article Text
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
Footnotes
Competing interests None.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Linked Articles
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- A critique of “the best secular argument against abortion”
- Abortion: Strong’s counterexamples fail
- Reply to Di Nucci: why the counterexamples succeed
- Strong's objections to the future of value account
- Savulescu’s objections to the future of value argument
- A future like ours revisited
- Deprivations, futures and the wrongness of killing
- On how to interpret the role of the future within the abortion debate
- Abortion and human nature
- The morality of abortion and the deprivation of futures