Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 21, 2026

Detection of miRNA Targets in High-throughput Using the 3'LIFE Assay
Published on: May 25, 2015
Why a right to life rules out infanticide: A final reply to Räsänen
Bruce P Blackshaw1, Daniel Rodger2
1Department of Philosophy, University of Birmingham, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Abstract:
Joona Räsänen has argued that pro-life arguments against the permissibility of infanticide are not persuasive, and fail to show it to be immoral. We responded to Räsänen's arguments, concluding that his critique of pro-life arguments was misplaced. Räsänen has recently replied in 'Why pro-life arguments still are not convincing: A reply to my critics', providing some additional arguments as to why he does not find pro-life arguments against infanticide convincing. Here, we respond briefly to Räsänen's critique of the substance view, and also to his most important claim: that possession of a right to life by an infant does not rule out the permissibility of infanticide. We demonstrate that this claim is unfounded, and conclude that Räsänen has not refuted pro-life arguments against infanticide.
Related Concept Videos
Exceptions to the Octet Rule
Half-life of a Reaction
Lewis Symbols and the Octet Rule
The Aufbau Principle and Hund's Rule
Characteristics of Life
The Angiosperm Life Cycle

