Three Errors in the Substance View's Defense
Abstract: According to the theory of intrinsic value and moral standing known as the \substance view," all human beings have intrinsic value, full moral standing and, with these, a right to life. The substance view has been defended by numerous contemporary philosophers who use the theory to argue that the standard human fetus has a right to life and, ultimately, that abortion is prima facie seriously wrong. In this paper, I identify three important errors committed by some of these philosophers in their defense of the theory|what I refer to as the \extratheoretical-proposition error," \quantitative-differences error," and \non-normative-answer error"|and conclude that these errors render their defense inadequate.
- Location
-
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek Frankfurt am Main
- Extent
-
Online-Ressource
- Language
-
Englisch
- Bibliographic citation
-
Three Errors in the Substance View's Defense ; volume:32 ; number:3 ; year:2018 ; pages:25-58 ; extent:34
Kriterion ; 32, Heft 3 (2018), 25-58 (gesamt 34)
- Creator
-
Lovering, Rob
- DOI
-
10.1515/krt-2018-320305
- URN
-
urn:nbn:de:101:1-2022090315130441080305
- Rights
-
Open Access; Der Zugriff auf das Objekt ist unbeschränkt möglich.
- Last update
- 15.08.2025, 7:34 AM CEST
Data provider
Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. If you have any questions about the object, please contact the data provider.
Associated
- Lovering, Rob
Other Objects (12)
Defense or retaliation : A German view
In Defense of the Lenient View
How students view the general nature of their errors
Defense Rejoinder of 29.06.1949 to the prosecution's reply to the Defense Petition concerning errors in the Judgment
Substance
Three lines of defense against risks from AI
Prosecution reply to the Defense motions concerning alleged errors in the Judgment of 17.06.1949
Adversarial attack and defense in reinforcement learning-from AI security view
Language in Language Evolution Research : In Defense of a Pluralistic View
Eliciting Substance from Hot Air : Financial Market Responses to EU Summit Decisions on European Defense
Three dimensional view of arbitrary q SYK models
Substance dualism
Defense or retaliation : A German view
In Defense of the Lenient View
How students view the general nature of their errors
Defense Rejoinder of 29.06.1949 to the prosecution's reply to the Defense Petition concerning errors in the Judgment
Substance
Three lines of defense against risks from AI
Prosecution reply to the Defense motions concerning alleged errors in the Judgment of 17.06.1949
Adversarial attack and defense in reinforcement learning-from AI security view
Language in Language Evolution Research : In Defense of a Pluralistic View
Eliciting Substance from Hot Air : Financial Market Responses to EU Summit Decisions on European Defense
Three dimensional view of arbitrary q SYK models
Substance dualism
Defense or retaliation : A German view
In Defense of the Lenient View
How students view the general nature of their errors
Defense Rejoinder of 29.06.1949 to the prosecution's reply to the Defense Petition concerning errors in the Judgment
Substance
Three lines of defense against risks from AI
Prosecution reply to the Defense motions concerning alleged errors in the Judgment of 17.06.1949
Adversarial attack and defense in reinforcement learning-from AI security view
Language in Language Evolution Research : In Defense of a Pluralistic View
Eliciting Substance from Hot Air : Financial Market Responses to EU Summit Decisions on European Defense
Three dimensional view of arbitrary q SYK models