Why arguments against infanticide remain convincing - a reply to Joona Räsänen
Rodger, D (2018). Why arguments against infanticide remain convincing - a reply to Joona Räsänen. Bioethics.
In ‘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.
|Keywords||infanticide; persons; substance view; after-birth abortion; abortion|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12423|
|25 Jan 2018|
|Publication process dates|
|Deposited||13 Dec 2017|
|Accepted||11 Dec 2017|
|Accepted author manuscript|
CC BY-NC 4.0
Accepted author manuscript
2views this month
0downloads this month