Related Ideas

The official view of abortion within the Catholic church is relevant here because the Church does not claim to know the exact point at which the embryo/fetus receives a soul or becomes a human being. Faced with this uncertainty, the Church argues instead that it is "probable" that the embryo is "ensouled" at conception and that it is "a grave sin to dare to risk murder" by aborting it.

The position of the Church raises difficult questions for everyone concerned with moral issues. What is the morally correct or best thing to do when knowledge is imperfect? Does uncertainty increase or decrease our freedom to act? Are we free to do as we wish unless we know that the act is wrong or that the consequences are quite terrible? If it is likely, but not certain, that some terrible consequence will follow, are we obliged to refrain from acting? What if there is a significant probability that the consequence will occur, but it is more likely that it will not? Does the gravity of the possible consequences tip the scales in favor of a conservative view? Or should we opt for liberty in the face of imperfect knowledge? Each of these views has a basis in common sense. Can you develop a consistent view and apply it to the question of abortion?

There is a debate among Catholic moral theologians about when the embryo should be regarded as a human being. Several concerns, including the possibility that a new embryo may split into two embryos or that two new embryos may merge into one, have led some writers to conclude that the very young embryo is not a fully individuated human being. They have asked whether it would be homicide to kill such an embryo.

Go back to: Ariadne's Home Page or go back to: Abortion Rights and Wrongs