Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 42 (3):155-168 (2021)

Authors
Anna Smajdor
University of Oslo
Abstract
Can discussion with members of the public show philosophers where they have gone wrong? Leslie Cannold argues that it can in her 1995 paper ‘Women, Ectogenesis and Ethical Theory’, which investigates the ways in which women reason about abortion and ectogenesis. In her study, Cannold interviewed female non-philosophers. She divided her participants into separate ‘pro-life’ and ‘pro-choice’ groups and asked them to consider whether the availability of ectogenesis would change their views about the morality of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. The women in Cannold’s study gave responses that did not map onto the dominant tropes in the philosophical literature. Yet Cannold did not attempt to reason with her participants, and her engagement with the philosophical literature is oddly limited, focussing only on the pro-choice perspective. In this paper, I explore the question of whether Cannold is correct that philosophers’ reasoning about abortion is lacking in some way. I suggest that there are alternative conclusions to be drawn from the data she gathered and that a critical approach is necessary when attempting to undertake philosophy informed by empirical data.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11017-021-09549-w
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,214
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Philosophy Without Intuitions.Herman Cappelen - 2012 - Oxford University Press UK.
A Defense of Abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66.
Experimental Philosophy.Joshua Knobe & Shaun Nichols (eds.) - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Why Abortion is Immoral.Don Marquis - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):183-202.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Women, Ectogenesis and Ethical Theory.Leslie Cannold - 1995 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):55-64.
Previous AHOYs in Support of Ron.Lyn Allison & Leslie Cannold - 2012 - The Australian Humanist (107):3.
In Defense of Ectogenesis.Anna Smajdor - 2012 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (1):90-103.
Reply to 'the Other Abortion Myth—the Failure of the Common Law'.Leslie Cannold - 2009 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (1):129-130.
Medical Ethics and Broadening the Context of Debate.John McMillan - 2020 - Journal of Medical Ethics 46 (2):65-65.
Research Priorities and the Future of Pregnancy.Timothy F. Murphy - 2012 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21 (1):78-89.
What Is the Justice-Care Debate Really About?Leslie Cannold, Peter Singer, Helga Kuhse & Lori Gruen - 1995 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 20 (1):357-377.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-11-30

Total views
3 ( #1,358,108 of 2,507,563 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,626 of 2,507,563 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes