home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!caen!uvaarpa!murdoch!galen.med.Virginia.EDU!gjh
- From: gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: Slavery and abortion (again)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan12.220329.20704@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
- Date: 12 Jan 93 22:03:29 GMT
- References: <1993Jan12.140528.12076@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <7z-3pxc@rpi.edu> <markp.726863336@joplin.wri.com>
- Sender: usenet@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
- Organization: University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <markp.726863336@joplin.wri.com> markp@joplin.wri.com (Mark Pundurs) writes:
- }In <7z-3pxc@rpi.edu> keegan@acm.rpi.edu (James G. Keegan Jr.) writes:
- }
- }>referring to abortion,
- }>gjh@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (Galen J. Hekhuis) writes:
- }
- }>->There is absolutely no other situation in which
- }>->an individual is inside the body of another. Think about
- }>->it a minute. There is no useful analogy.
- }
- }>i agree fully with galen's comments.
- }
- }I strongly disagree. Analogy is an indispensible component of rational
- }discourse about the real world. If we completely rule out analogies
- }to abortion, we leave ourselves no ground for meaningful discussion.
- }(Of course, all analogies have their limits, and we must be careful
- }to see what those limits are in any case.)
-
- The fact that the two situations are not analogous does not mean
- or imply that there can be no rational discussion of the two.
- Neither does it "completely rule out analogies." It simply
- means that the two things are too different to draw meaninful
- conclusions about one from the other. It doesn't mean that rational
- discussion cannot be carried out, as you seem to imply.
-
- I knew that thinking was hard for some people...
-
- --
- hang gliding mailing list: hang-gliding-request@virginia.edu
- Galen Hekhuis UVa Health Sci Ctr (804)982-1646 gjh@virginia.edu
- Illiterate? Write for FREE help...
-