- Title
- When is it legitimate to use images in moral arguments? The use of foetal imagery in anti-abortion campaigns as an exemplar of an illegitimate instance of a legitimate practice
- Creator
- Kelland, Lindsay
- Creator
- Macleod, Catriona I
- Date Issued
- 2015
- Date
- 2015
- Type
- Article
- Identifier
- vital:6305
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1016146
- Description
- We aim to interrogate when the use of images in moral persuasion is legitimate. First, we put forward a number of accounts which purport to show that we can use tools other than logical argumentation to convince others, that such tools evoke affective responses and that these responses have authority in the moral domain. Second, we turn to Sarah McGrath’s account, which focuses on the use of imagery as a means to morally persuade. McGrath discusses 4 objections to the use of imagery, and outlines responses that may be used to legitimate the use of imagery in moral arguments. Assuming that we accept her account and that the invocation of affect has authority in the moral domain, we, using McGrath’s responses, examine whether the use of foetal imagery in anti-abortion campaigns is a legitimate instance of this practice.
- Format
- 27 pages
- Format
- Publisher
- Sage Publications
- Language
- English
- Relation
- Kelland, L. & Macleod, C. (2015). When is it legitimate to use images in moral arguments? The use of foetal imagery in anti-abortion campaigns as an exemplar of an illegitimate instance of a legitimate practice. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 41(2) 179–195.
- Rights
- Pre-print version
- Hits: 993
- Visitors: 1215
- Downloads: 258
Collections
Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
View Details Download | SOURCEPDF | 108 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |