Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 19, 2026

Intraoperative Assessment of Resection Margins in Oral Cavity Cancer: This is the Way
Published on: May 10, 2021
Is the argument from marginal cases obtuse?
1Seattle University, Seattle, WA 98122, USA. DDOMBROW@seattle.edu
Abstract:
Elizabeth Anderson claims that the argument from marginal cases is 'the central argument' behind the claim that nonhuman animals have rights. But she thinks, along with Cora Diamond, that the argument is 'obtuse'. Two different meanings could be intended here: that the argument from marginal cases is too blunt or dull to dissect the reasons why it makes sense to say that nonhuman animals have rights or that the argument from marginal cases is insensitive regarding nonrational human beings (the marginal cases of humanity). The purpose of the present article is to argue that, despite Anderson's and Diamond's nuanced and perceptive treatments of the argument from marginal cases, this argument is not obtuse in either sense of the term.
Related Concept Videos
Fundamental Attribution Error
Case Studies
Quantifying and Rejecting Outliers: The Grubbs Test
Reason and Intuition
The Availability Heuristic
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
