Rule utilitarians approach abortion by asking, "What rule about killing (including abortion) would have the best consequences for society to adopt and try to follow?"
How might rule utilitarians criticize this rule: "Killing is permissible whenever this maximizes good consequences."
Rule utilitarians approach abortion by asking, "What rule about killing (including abortion) would have the best consequences for society to adopt and try to follow?"
How might rule utilitarians criticize this rule: "Killing is permissible whenever this maximizes good consequences."
Nonconsequentialists might object in this way -- but not rule utilitarians.
Rule utilitarians approach abortion by asking, "What rule about killing (including abortion) would have the best consequences for society to adopt and try to follow?"
How might rule utilitarians criticize this rule: "Killing is permissible whenever this maximizes good consequences."
Supernaturalists might object in this way.
Rule utilitarians approach abortion by asking, "What rule about killing (including abortion) would have the best consequences for society to adopt and try to follow?"
How might rule utilitarians criticize this rule: "Killing is permissible whenever this maximizes good consequences."
Imagine what it would be like if your friends and relatives felt authorized to kill whenever they speculated that killing would have the best consequences. People would apply this in irresponsible ways, and respect for life would diminish. A rule against killing needs to be firm and definite.