The controversy surrounding abortion is one of the most significant issues in biomedical

ethics. This debate has a long history and is still heavily debated among researchers and the general
publicᅳboth in terms of morality and legality (Stewart-Gordon, 2008). Opinions range from
believing that the fetus is a human being with full moral status and rights from conception to
believing that a fetus has no rights, even if it is biologically human (Steinhock et al., 2023).

In line to this the discussion of the ethics of abortion must rest on 1 or more of several
foundations: whether or not the fetus is a human being; the rights of the pregnant woman as
opposed to those of the fetus, and circumstances of horror and hardship that might surround a
pregnancy. However, discussing this issue it must rest on the viability of the concept. Because
viability is not a specific descriptive entity, value judgments become part of the determination, both
of viability and the actions that might be taken based on that determination. The fetus does not
become a full human being at viability (Fromer, 1982).

Looking in the other fields, in politics and religion, they can play a big role in shaping
opinions of the public regarding the topic of abortion. In the statistics given by the Pew Research
Center it is reported that 10 out 4 Americans who viewed themselves as a Democrat viewed
abortion as an immoral practice that should be abolished.

No matter what abortion is or how any discipline defines it. To balance the judgment, it's
critical to view them from a different angle. According to Stewart-Gordon's article from 2008, there
are three main points of view: the Catholic Church's extreme conservative view, Singer's extreme
liberal view, and moderate views that fall somewhere in the middle. Some opponents
(anti-abortionists, pro-life activists) hold the extreme position, arguing that because of the imago
dei of the human being, one should not have an abortion because human personhood begins from
the unicellular zygote (Schwarz, 1990).

Abortion is looked at in many different ways but looking at them through a philosophical
angle is the best way to see how it is related to our morality. Through philosophy we can see them in
an unbiased way that uses solely reasons by mankind.

Philosophy and Abortion

Abortion is a philosophically interesting issue because both sides seem so certain of their
conclusions, yet the issue is at the same time clearly a derivative one (Baker, 1985). In exploring the
philosophy of truth, certitude, and error it can show how the issue of abortion is viewed in the
different fields of philosophy.

In the philosophy of truth, many philosophers such as John B. Hymes have concluded that
abortion is a problem of objective morals, truth and virtue. In his article in 2021 he stated that
moral problems such as abortion, should provide a variety of tactics to rediscover virtue and
objective moral truth, rather than simply be a breeding ground for excuses in the avoidance of guilt.

However contradicting to Hymes (2021) philosophy of truth and abortion, Lanphier (2023)
argued that the philosophy of truth is necessary in a political and social context that threatens
abortion rights and access and are mixed with elements of restitution that can reveal the
complexities of experiential knowledge and standing, produced in a context in which experience is
marginalized and moralized.

Moving on to the philosophy of certitude