Article Text
Abstract
In a recent article in this journal, Anna Christensen raises an ‘Epicurean challenge’ to Don Marquis’ much-discussed argument for the immorality of abortion. According to Marquis’ argument, abortion is pro tanto morally wrong because it deprives the fetus of ‘a future like ours’. Drawing on the Epicurean idea that death cannot harm its victim because there is no subject to be harmed, Christensen argues that neither fetuses nor anyone else can be deprived of a future like ours by dying. Thus, Christensen suggests, the moral wrongness of abortion (and other killings) cannot be grounded in the relevant individual’s being deprived of a future like ours. In this reply, I argue that on no interpretation of Christensen’s Epicurean challenge does it succeed.
- Abortion
- Death
- Ethics
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Linked Articles
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Abortion and deprivation: a reply to Marquis
- Meeting the Epicurean challenge: a reply to Christensen
- Strong's objections to the future of value account
- Reply to Di Nucci: why the counterexamples succeed
- Meeting the Epicurean challenge: a reply to ’Abortion and Deprivation'
- Reply to Marquis: how things stand with the ‘future like ours’ argument
- Abortion: Strong’s counterexamples fail
- A defence of the potential future of value theory
- Continuing conversations about abortion and deprivation
- Savulescu’s objections to the future of value argument