Philosophical analysis uncovers significant arguments against non-sentience influencing abortion's morality.
This article presents five arguments against the idea that non-sentience is a sufficient condition for not considering abortion an immoral act: the formal paradox argument, the third-person argument, the abortionist status argument, the implicit antinatalist premise argument, and the manipulation argument. These five arguments do not disqualify pro-abortion approaches that do not use the element of non-sentience but suggest that it would be appropriate for these approaches to also consider them. The existence of these other pro-abortion arguments shows that non-sentience is not a necessary condition either for trying to show that abortion is not immoral.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Júlio Cabrera (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: