Results for 'Infanticide'

21 found
Order:
See also
Bibliography: Infanticide in Applied Ethics
  1. Pro‐Life Arguments Against Infanticide and Why They Are Not Convincing.Joona Räsänen - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (9):656-662.
    Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva's controversial article ‘After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?’ has received a lot of criticism since its publishing. Part of the recent criticism has been made by pro-life philosopher Christopher Kaczor, who argues against infanticide in his updated book ‘Ethics of Abortion’. Kaczor makes four arguments to show where Giubilini and Minerva's argument for permitting infanticide goes wrong. In this article I argue that Kaczor's arguments, and some similar arguments presented by other philosophers, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2. Abortion and Infanticide: A Triple Libertarian and Critical-Rationalist Defence.J. C. Lester - manuscript
    From libertarian and critical-rationalist assumptions, the moral permissibility of abortion and infanticide can be explained and defended in three principal ways; although non-libertarians and justificationists could also accept these arguments. These include new theories of personhood (in critical-rationalist terms) and harm-infliction (in libertarian terms). The three defences are independent of each other but collectively consistent. 1) The unborn and infant human is not a person in the relevant intellectual and moral sense, because incapable of critically appraising abstract conjectures. 2) (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Beyond Infanticide: How Psychological Accounts of Persons Can Justify Harming Infants.Daniel Rodger, Bruce P. Blackshaw & Calum Miller - 2018 - The New Bioethics 24 (2):106-121.
    It is commonly argued that a serious right to life is grounded only in actual, relatively advanced psychological capacities a being has acquired. The moral permissibility of abortion is frequently argued for on these grounds. Increasingly it is being argued that such accounts also entail the permissibility of infanticide, with several proponents of these theories accepting this consequence. We show, however, that these accounts imply the permissibility of even more unpalatable acts than infanticide performed on infants: organ harvesting, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4.  45
    Why a Right to Life Rules Out Infanticide: A Final Reply to Räsänen.Bruce P. Blackshaw & Daniel Rodger - 2019 - Bioethics 33 (8):965-967.
    Joona Räsänen has argued that pro‐life arguments against the permissibility of infanticide are not persuasive, and fail to show it to be immoral. We responded to Räsänen’s arguments, concluding that his critique of pro‐life arguments was misplaced. Räsänen has recently replied in ‘Why pro‐life arguments still are not convincing: A reply to my critics’, providing some additional arguments as to why he does not find pro‐life arguments against infanticide convincing. Here, we respond briefly to Räsänen’s critique of the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Od eutanazie k infanticidě.Tomas Hribek - 2015 - Časopis Zdravotnického Práva a Bioetiky 5 (1):5-27.
    [From Euthanasia to Infanticide] The paper revisits the recent controversy over Dr. Mitlőhner’s defense of infanticide, published in this journal. In section 1, I point out the weaknesses of Mitlőhner’s paper. In sections 2 and 3 I turn to the most sophisticated defense of infanticide on offer today, that of Peter Singer’s. Section 2 sums up Singer’s description of the medical practice as already having abandoned the traditional ethic of equal value of all human lives, which motivates (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  51
    Infanticide and Potentiality.Benjamin Williamson - manuscript
    Nicole Hassoun and Uriah Kriegel defend the position that infanticide is morally permissible because an infant a few days old does not have a self-concept and thus is not a person. I argue their position is flawed and cannot principally rule out the possible permissibility of slavery.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  95
    Why Pro‐Life Arguments Still Are Not Convincing: A Reply to My Critics.Joona Räsänen - 2018 - Bioethics 32 (9):628-633.
    I argued in ‘Pro‐life arguments against infanticide and why they are not convincing’ that arguments presented by pro‐life philosophers are mistaken and cannot show infanticide to be immoral. Several scholars have offered responses to my arguments. In this paper, I reply to my critics: Daniel Rodger, Bruce P. Blackshaw and Clinton Wilcox. I also reply to Christopher Kaczor. I argue that pro‐life arguments still are not convincing.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8. Abortion, Persons, and Futures of Value.Donald Wilson - 2007 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (2):86-97.
    Don Marquis argues that his “future of value” account of the ethics of killing affords us a persuasive argument against abortion that avoids difficult questions about the moral status of the fetus. I argue that Marquis’ account is missing essential detail required for the claimed plausibility of the argument and that any attempt to provide this needed detail can be expected to undercut the claim of plausibility. I argue that this is the case because attempts to provide the missing detail (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Of Course the Baby Should Live: Against 'After-Birth Abortion'.Regina A. Rini - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):353-356.
    In a recent paper, Giubilini and Minerva argue for the moral permissibility of what they call ‘after-birth abortion’, or infanticide. Here I suggest that they actually employ a confusion of two distinct arguments: one relying on the purportedly identical moral status of a fetus and a newborn, and the second giving an independent argument for the denial of moral personhood to infants (independent of whatever one might say about fetuses). After distinguishing these arguments, I suggest that neither one is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  10. The Ethics of Killing, an Amoral Enquiry.Cheng-Chih Tsai - 2015 - Applied Ethics Review 59:25-49.
    In ‘What Makes Killing Wrong?’ Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller make the bold claim that killing in itself is not wrong, what is wrong is totally-disabling. In ‘After-Birth Abortion: Why Should the Baby Live?’ Giubilini and Minerva argue for allowing infanticide. Both papers challenge the stigma commonly associated with killing, and emphasize that killing is not wrong at some margins of life. In this paper, we first generalize the above claims to the thesis that there is nothing morally wrong with killing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  19
    Paired Papers.Trevor Stammers - 2018 - The New Bioethics 24 (2):105-105.
    Editorial on papers relating to among other infanticide and intersex.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12. Killing Fetuses and Killing Newborns.Ezio Di Nucci - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (5):19-20.
    The argument for the moral permissibility of killing newborns is a challenge to liberal positions on abortion because it can be considered a reductio of their defence of abortion. Here I defend the liberal stance on abortion by arguing that the argument for the moral permissibility of killing newborns on ground of the social, psychological and economic burden on the parents recently put forward by Giubilini and Minerva is not valid; this is because they fail to show that newborns cannot (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  13.  58
    The Importance of Rationality.G. Owen Schaefer - 2013 - Hastings Center Report 43 (1):3.
    Michael Hauskeller (“Reflections from a Troubled Stream: Giubliani and Minerva on ‘After-Birth Abortion’) has recently suggested that we should resist rationalist tendencies in moral discourse: “[I]s not all morality ultimately irrational? Even the most strongly held moral convictions can be shown to lack a rational basis.” (Hauskeller 2012, p. 18) Hauskeller was responding to Alberto Giubliani and Francesca Minverva’s (2012) recent defense of the permissibility of killing infants, but his anti-rationality arguments have wide-reaching implications. Yet pace Hauskeller, rationality is indeed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Contraception and Abortion: A Utilitarian View.Leslie Allan - manuscript
    Conservative and liberal approaches to the problem of abortion are oversimplified and deeply flawed. Accepting that the moral status of the conceptus changes during gestation, the author advances a more nuanced perspective. Through applying a form of rules in practice utilitarianism within the context of overall population policy, he provides a compelling ethical and legal framework for regulating contraception and abortion practices.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Defending the Distinction Between Pregnancy and Parenthood.Prabhpal Singh - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 1:1-3.
    In this paper, I respond to criticisms toward my account of the difference in moral status between fetuses and newborns. I show my critics have not adequately argued for their view that pregnant women participate in a parent-child relationship. While an important counterexample is raised against my account, this counterexample had already been dealt with in my original paper. Because the criticisms against my account lack argumentative support, they do not pose a problem for my account. I conclude the raised (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  91
    A Review of The Murderer Next Door by David Buss (2005).Starks Michael - 2017 - In Suicidal Utopian Delusions in the 21st Century. pp. 390-397.
    Though this volume is a bit dated, there are few recent popular books dealing specifically with the psychology of murder and it’s a quick overview available for a few dollars, so still well worth the effort. It makes no attempt to be comprehensive and is somewhat superficial in places, with the reader expected to fill in the blanks from his many other books and the vast literature on violence. For an update see e.g., Buss, The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology 2nd (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  17.  23
    ANTICHRIST (2009), a Lars von Trier Movie, Seen as a Critique to the All Too Human Pretension to Reason's Omnipotence.Marcos Wagner da Cunha - manuscript
    Lars von Trier's works give us allways plenty of exquisite philosophical food for thought, mostly in very dense and hermetic language. 'Melancholia' , a 2011 movie, has been seen by us as a brilliant dramatization of Schopenhauer's and Nietzsche's philosophy, also available on PhilArchives. 'Antichrist', another movies of his from 2009, deploys a similar doom perspective regarding our times, now focusing the perpetual struggle between men and women as a leitomotiv. This brief review, however, does not intend to go beyond (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Fetuses, Newborns, and Parental Responsibility.Prabhpal Singh - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (3):188-193.
    I defend a relational account of difference in the moral status between fetuses and newborns. The difference in moral status between a fetus and a newborn is that the newborn baby is the proper object of ‘parental responsibility’ whereas the fetus is not. ‘Parental responsibilities’ are a moral dimension of a ‘parent-child relation’, a relation which newborn babies stand in, but fetuses do not. I defend this relational account by analyzing the concepts of ‘parent’ and ‘child’, and conclude that the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  19.  61
    Grandfather Paradox in Time Travel.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    The most well-known example of the impossibility of traveling in time is the grandfather paradox or self-infanticide argument: a person who travels in the past and kills his own grandfather, thus preventing the existence of one of his parents and thus his own existence. A philosophical response to this paradox would be the impossibility of changing the past, like Novikov self-consistency principle (if an event exists that would cause a paradox or any "change" to the past whatsoever, then the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  17
    Paradoxe du grand-père.Nicolae Sfetcu - manuscript
    L'exemple le plus connu de l'impossibilité de voyager dans le temps est le paradoxe du grand-père ou l'argument de l'auto-infanticide: une personne qui voyage dans le passé et tue son propre grand-père, empêchant ainsi l'existence d'un de ses parents et donc sa propre existence. Une réponse philosophique à ce paradoxe serait l'impossibilité de changer le passé, (à l'instar du principe de cohérence de Novikov. Le paradoxe du grand-père implique toute action qui change le passé. Il se présente sous de (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  43
    Faussetés imaginaires.Yvan Tétreault - 2010 - Les ateliers de l'éthique/The Ethics Forum 5 (1):66-82.
    Les récits de fiction comportant une moralité déviante posent parfois problème quant à la détermination de ce qui est « vrai dans l’histoire ». Si par exemple on a aucune difficulté à considérer comme vrai dans le monde imaginaire que « Giselda a tué son bébé », les choses sont différentes lorsqu’il s’agit d’imaginer une situation dans laquelle nos valeurs morales sont remises en question. Confronté à un récit comportant l’énoncé « Giselda a fait la bonne chose en tuant son (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark