Harming the Non-conscious
Peter Singer has argued that nothing done to a fetus before it acquires consciousness can harm it. At the same time, he concedes that a child can be harmed by something done to it when it was a non-conscious fetus. But this implies that the non-conscious fetus can be harmed. The mistake lies in thin...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
1999
|
In: |
Bioethics
Year: 1999, Volume: 13, Issue: 3/4, Pages: 294-305 |
Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Summary: | Peter Singer has argued that nothing done to a fetus before it acquires consciousness can harm it. At the same time, he concedes that a child can be harmed by something done to it when it was a non-conscious fetus. But this implies that the non-conscious fetus can be harmed. The mistake lies in thinking that, since existence can be intrinsically bad for a being only if it is conscious, it can be harmed only if it is conscious. In fact, its being harmed only implies that it could have been conscious (and led a good life). |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1467-8519 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Bioethics
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/1467-8519.00158 |