| Title |
If Abortion, then Infanticide
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11017-017-9419-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David B. Hershenov, Rose J. Hershenov |
| Abstract |
Our contention is that all of the major arguments for abortion are also arguments for permitting infanticide. One cannot distinguish the fetus from the infant in terms of a morally significant intrinsic property, nor are they morally discernible in terms of standing in different relationships to others. The logic of our position is that if such arguments justify abortion, then they also justify infanticide. If we are right that infanticide is not justified, then such arguments will fail to justify abortion. We respond to those philosophers who accept infanticide by putting forth a novel account of how the mindless can be wronged which serves to distinguish morally significant potential from morally irrelevant potential. This allows our account to avoid the standard objection that many entities possess a potential for personhood which we are intuitively under no obligation to further or protect. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 84% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 12% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philosophy | 5 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,420,329
of 25,736,439 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#10
of 382 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,561
of 328,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,736,439 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 382 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them