The relevance of metaphysics to bioethics: A reply to Earl Conee

Mind 109 (434):275-279 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We shall find that the metaphysical views offered on behalf of moral conclusions about abortion do nothing in defence of those conclusions. Other disputable assumptions separate each moral conclusion from the invoked metaphysical view. It is the defensibility of the other assumptions that is crucial. No metaphysical view cited on behalf of a moral conclusion substantially advances the argument in favour of the conclusion.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Moral disagreement and moral expertise.Sarah McGrath - 2008 - In Russ Shafer-Landau (ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaethics: Volume 3. Oxford University Press. pp. 87-108.
Reply to Timothy Chappell.Earl Conee - 2000 - Mind 109 (434):281-283.
Metaphysics and the morality of abortion.E. Conee - 1999 - Mind 108 (432):619-646.
Epistemology. [REVIEW]Earl Conee - 2007 - Review of Metaphysics 61 (1):134-135.
Against moral dilemmas.Earl Conee - 1982 - Philosophical Review 91 (1):87-97.
The moral value in promises.Earl Conee - 2000 - Philosophical Review 109 (3):411-422.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
49 (#309,238)

6 months
16 (#136,207)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Sophie Grace Chappell
Open University (UK)

Citations of this work

Personal Identity and Ethics.David Shoemaker - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references