Review of SHERRY F. COLB AND MICHAEL C. DORF Beating Hearts: Abortion and Animal Rights [Book Review]

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In this book, law professors Sherry F. Colb and Michael C. Dorf argue that: many non-human animals, at least vertebrates, are morally considerable and prima facie wrong to harm because they are sentient, i.e., conscious and capable of experiencing pains and pleasures; most aborted human fetuses are not sentient -- their brains and nervous systems are not yet developed enough for sentience -- and so the motivating moral concern for animals doesn't apply to most abortions[2]; later abortions affecting sentient fetuses, while rare, raise serious moral concerns, but these abortions -- like all abortions -- invariably involve the interests and rights of the pregnant woman, which can make these abortions morally permissible. For a book claiming to explore the "connections" between debates about the two issues, just the summary from the book flap -- basically, what's above -- makes it appear that there really isn't much connection between the topics, at least at the core ethical level. Animals are sentient, early fetuses are not, and so the moral arguments about the two issues don't overlap or share premises. While the authors hope to use insights from one issue to shed light on the other, I find that differences in the issues limit these insights.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
NOBROS-2
Revision history
Archival date: 2017-08-11
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Moral Vegetarianism.Doggett, Tyler

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2017-08-11

Total views
56 ( #30,520 of 40,122 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #36,226 of 40,122 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.