Foosball Search cat

3 comments:

Doctor Why said...

Rosalind Hursthouse is a proponent of virtue ethics. Therefore, the main problem for them cited in any subject (from his book "Theory of Virtue and abortion") "after an abortion in such a case the officer would act virtuous or vicious, or not?"

Because this approach assumes that the rights of the mother, fetus, or technological and medical knowledge is not relevant. A person can behave badly, even if they have the right, and what is right should be clear to the average person.

While subsidies can a woman have an abortion do not act so ("... no right answer, but a variety of reactions, including ..."), suggests that most people take for reasons they have not at all fair. The desire for freedom, as selfish, and anxiety about his ability as parents to give us the ability, or the child's environment, "she cried cowardice.

Although the circumstances are termination of pregnancy, what to do, keep it orThis is often the sign of an antiquated environment. "Well, the fact that human life was short, something evil has been caused and that the circumstances that make the decision to the right decision with evil a cause for error when circumstances get in the first, obvious failure of character. In other words, even if the abortion is done virtuously, but due to participation in turn not virtuous (sex, get in a bad situation, etc..)

It has a more nuanced view. It is possible that abortion is okay, but usually not a sign of vice as a virtue.

February 3, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Hic said...

To read and think she wants to question without discussing your own position. He used many words that leads to the hideout.

February 3, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Anthony H said...

Hello - Well, I have a clear answer and I email and asked him for his opinion. Take his answer ... Cheers.

February 3, 2010 at 8:52 PM