Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T05:03:25.547Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abortion and Non-Fallacious Potentiality: A Reply to Berkich

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2009

Travis Dumsday
Travis Dumsday
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Intervention/Discussion
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , Spring 2008 , pp. 387 - 394
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berkich, D. 2007 “A Fallacy in Potentiality.” Dialogue, 46, 1: 137–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broad, C. D. 1949 “The ‘Nature’ of a Continuant.” In Readings in Philosophical Analysis. Edited by Feigl, H. and Sellars, W.. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, pp. 472–81.Google Scholar
Hare, R. M. 1975 “Abortion and the Golden Rule.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4, 3: 201–22.Google ScholarPubMed
Marquis, D. 1989 “Why Abortion Is Immoral.” The Journal of Philosophy, 86, 4: 183–202.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noonan, J. T. Jr., 1970 “An Almost Absolute Value in History.” In The Morality of Abortion: Legal and Historical Perspectives. Edited by Noonan, J. T.. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 1–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pruss, A. R. 2002 “I Was Once a Fetus: That Is Why Abortion Is Wrong.” Life and Learning, 12: 169–82.Google Scholar
Stone, J. 1987 “Why Potentiality Matters.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 17, 4: 815–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar