Why arguments against infanticide remain convincing: A reply to Räsänen

Publisher： John Wiley & Sons Inc

E-ISSN： 1467-8519|32|3|215-219

ISSN： 0269-9702

Source： BIOETHICS, Vol.32, Iss.3, 2018-03, pp. : 215-219

Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.

Previous Menu Next

Abstract

AbstractIn ‘Pro‐life arguments against infanticide and why they are not convincing’ Joona Räsänen argues that Christopher Kaczor's objections to Giubilini and Minerva's position on infanticide are not persuasive. We argue that Räsänen's criticism is largely misplaced, and that he has not engaged with Kaczor's strongest arguments against infanticide. We reply to each of Räsänen's criticisms, drawing on the full range of Kaczor's arguments, as well as adding some of our own.

Related content

A dubious defense of ‘after‐birth abortion’: A reply to Räsänen

By  

BIOETHICS, Vol. 32, Iss. 2, 2018-02 ,pp. : 132-137 (6)

John Wiley & Sons Inc

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

The lies remain the same: A reply to Chalmers

By Clarke Steve  

Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 73, Iss. 1, 1995-03 ,pp. : 152-155 (4)

Routledge Ltd

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

A priori refutations of disagreement arguments against moral objectivity: Why experience matters

By Gowans Christopher  

The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 38, Iss. 2, 2004-06 ,pp. : 141-157 (17)

Springer Publishing Company

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Why Conclusions Should Remain Single

By Steinberger Florian  

Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 40, Iss. 3, 2011-06 ,pp. : 333-355 (23)

Springer Publishing Company

Access to resources Recommend Favorite

Nagelian Arguments Against Egoism

By Rachels S.  

Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 80, Iss. 2, 2002-06 ,pp. : 191-208 (18)

Routledge Ltd

Access to resources Recommend Favorite