172 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31834552)
1. Schrödinger's fetus examined.
Blackshaw BP
Med Health Care Philos; 2020 Jun; 23(2):321-323. PubMed ID: 31834552
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Schrödinger's Fetus.
Räsänen J
Med Health Care Philos; 2020 Mar; 23(1):125-130. PubMed ID: 31325076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The future-like-ours argument, animalism, and mereological universalism.
Sauchelli A
Bioethics; 2018 Mar; 32(3):199-204. PubMed ID: 29369389
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Avoiding the Personhood Issue: Abortion, Identity, and Marquis's 'Future-Like-Ours' Argument.
Reitan E
Bioethics; 2016 May; 30(4):272-81. PubMed ID: 26424415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Identity Objection to the future-like-ours argument.
Brill S
Bioethics; 2019 Feb; 33(2):287-293. PubMed ID: 30480832
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The parenthood argument.
Simkulet W
Bioethics; 2018 Jan; 32(1):10-15. PubMed ID: 29171657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Does the Identity Objection to the future-like-ours argument succeed?
Blackshaw BP
Bioethics; 2020 Feb; 34(2):203-206. PubMed ID: 31769884
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abortion and the Epicurean challenge.
Ekendahl K
J Med Ethics; 2020 Apr; 46(4):273-274. PubMed ID: 31630130
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Meeting the Epicurean challenge: a reply to Christensen.
Blackshaw BP; Rodger D
J Med Ethics; 2019 Jul; 45(7):478-479. PubMed ID: 30772840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Fine-tuning the impairment argument.
Blackshaw BP; Hendricks P
J Med Ethics; 2021 Sep; 47(9):641-642. PubMed ID: 33172908
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The Impairment Argument and Future-Like-Ours: A Problematic Dependence.
Bobier C
J Bioeth Inq; 2023 Sep; 20(3):353-357. PubMed ID: 37278912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Marquis: a defense of abortion?
Gelfand SD
Bioethics; 2001 Apr; 15(2):135-45. PubMed ID: 11697378
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Future-like-ours as a metaphysical reductio ad absurdum argument of personal identity.
Chaffer TJ
Bioethics; 2023 May; 37(4):367-373. PubMed ID: 36773306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Strengthened impairment argument does not restate Marquis.
Blackshaw BP
J Med Ethics; 2021 Mar; ():. PubMed ID: 33687914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Spontaneous abortion and unexpected death: a critical discussion of Marquis on abortion.
Coleman MC
J Med Ethics; 2013 Feb; 39(2):89-93. PubMed ID: 23038800
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The future-like-ours argument, personal identity, and the twinning dilemma.
Brill HS
Soc Theory Pract; 2003 Jul; 29(3):419-30. PubMed ID: 14696604
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. The deprivation argument against abortion.
Stretton D
Bioethics; 2004 Apr; 18(2):144-80. PubMed ID: 15148946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Against the impairment argument: A reply to Hendricks.
Räsänen J
Bioethics; 2020 Oct; 34(8):862-864. PubMed ID: 32017158
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Abortion and deprivation: a reply to Marquis.
Christensen A
J Med Ethics; 2019 Jan; 45(1):22-25. PubMed ID: 30429204
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Relating to foetal persons: why women's Voices come first and last, but not alone in Abortion debates.
Milford S
Med Health Care Philos; 2023 Sep; 26(3):293-300. PubMed ID: 37171743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
