- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Why Inconsistency Arguments Matter
The New Bioethics 28 (1):40-53 (2021)
Abstract
Abortion opponents are sometimes accused of having inconsistent beliefs, actions, and/or priorities. If they were consistent, they would regard spontaneous abortions to be a greater moral tragedy,...Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Why inconsistency arguments fail: a response to Shaw.Bruce P. Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2022 - The New Bioethics 28 (2):139-151.
Prolife Hypocrisy: Why Inconsistency Arguments Do Not Matter.Nicholas Colgrove, Bruce Philip Blackshaw & Daniel Rodger - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics (Online First):1-6.
The Moral Significance of Abortion Inconsistency Arguments.William Simkulet - 2021 - Asian Bioethics Review 14 (1):41-56.
Hypocrisy, Consistency, and Opponents of Abortion.Bruce P. Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2022 - In Nicholas Colgrove, Bruce P. Blackshaw & Daniel Rodger (eds.), Agency, Pregnancy and Persons: Essays in Defense of Human Life. Oxford, UK: Routledge. pp. 127-144.
Hypocrisy, Consistency, and Opponents of Abortion.Bruce P. Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2022 - In Nicholas Colgrove, Bruce P. Blackshaw & Daniel Rodger (eds.), Agency, Pregnancy and Persons: Essays in Defense of Human Life. Oxford, UK: Routledge. pp. 127-144.
Abortion, Adoption, and Integrity: the Demands of Integrity for Opponents of Abortion.Kate Finley - 2022 - In Nicholas Colgrove, Bruce P. Blackshaw & Daniel Rodger (eds.), Agency, Pregnancy and Persons: Essays in Defense of Human Life. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Inconsistency arguments still do not matter.Bruce P. Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 1:1-4.
Anti-abortionist Action Theory and the Asymmetry between Spontaneous and Induced Abortions.Matthew Lee Anderson - 2023 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 48 (3):209-224.
Analytics
Added to PP
2021-12-07
Downloads
41 (#544,062)
6 months
5 (#1,035,390)
2021-12-07
Downloads
41 (#544,062)
6 months
5 (#1,035,390)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Unintended Intrauterine Death and Preterm Delivery: What Does Philosophy Have to Offer?Nicholas Colgrove - 2023 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 48 (3):195-208.
Why inconsistency arguments fail: a response to Shaw.Bruce P. Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2022 - The New Bioethics 28 (2):139-151.
Deadly Language Games: Theological Reflections on Emerging Reproductive Technologies.Nicholas Colgrove - 2024 - Christian Bioethics 30 (2):67-84.
References found in this work
Gestaticide: Killing the Subject of the Artificial Womb.Daniel Rodger, Nicholas Colgrove & Bruce Philip Blackshaw - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):e53.
Abortion and Ectogenesis: Moral Compromise.William Simkulet - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (2):93-98.
The scourge: Moral implications of natural embryo loss.Toby Ord - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (7):12 – 19.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-f8568656d-ksrwm uwo