Property, bodies and Wittgenstien

Hugh V. McLachlan

doi:10.2174/1874761200903010028

Property, bodies and Wittgenstien

Hugh V. McLachlan

Sociology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

Abstract

It is Quigley’s view that we should regard our own human bodies as our property. Wittgenstein’s famous comments about games and family resemblances are cited in support of this contention. She thinks that classification of bodies as property is significant and that it will help us to answer the ethical and political questions about how we should treat and be permitted to treat body parts, tissues and such like. This paper seeks to show that, although Wittgenstein’s comments about games and family resemblances might help us to think more clearly about the philosophical problem of universals, they do not lead one to imagine that bodies are property.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	28-31
Number of pages	4
Journal	Open Ethics Journal
Volume	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.2174/1874761200903010028
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2009

Fingerprint

Family Resemblance

Human Body

Philosophical Problems

Problem of Universals

Body Parts

Keywords

ethics
philosophy
essentialism
nominalism
human body
Wittgenstein

Cite this

McLachlan, H. V. (2009). Property, bodies and Wittgenstien. Open Ethics Journal, 3, 28-31. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874761200903010028

McLachlan, Hugh V. / Property, bodies and Wittgenstien. In: Open Ethics Journal. 2009 ; Vol. 3. pp. 28-31.

@article{9ce54f828d8d4224a55e82fdc84ef7cd,

title = "Property, bodies and Wittgenstien",

abstract = "It is Quigley’s view that we should regard our own human bodies as our property. Wittgenstein’s famous comments about games and family resemblances are cited in support of this contention. She thinks that classification of bodies as property is significant and that it will help us to answer the ethical and political questions about how we should treat and be permitted to treat body parts, tissues and such like. This paper seeks to show that, although Wittgenstein’s comments about games and family resemblances might help us to think more clearly about the philosophical problem of universals, they do not lead one to imagine that bodies are property.",

keywords = "ethics, philosophy, essentialism, nominalism, human body, Wittgenstein",

author = "McLachlan, {Hugh V.}",

note = "<p>Originally published in: Open Ethics Journal (2009), 3, pp.28-31.</p>",

year = "2009",

month = "1",

day = "1",

doi = "10.2174/1874761200903010028",

language = "English",

volume = "3",

pages = "28--31",

journal = "Open Ethics Journal",

issn = "1874-7612",

publisher = "Bentham Open",

}

McLachlan, HV 2009, 'Property, bodies and Wittgenstien', Open Ethics Journal, vol. 3, pp. 28-31. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874761200903010028

Property, bodies and Wittgenstien. / McLachlan, Hugh V.

In: Open Ethics Journal, Vol. 3, 01.01.2009, p. 28-31.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Property, bodies and Wittgenstien

AU - McLachlan, Hugh V.

N1 - <p>Originally published in: Open Ethics Journal (2009), 3, pp.28-31.</p>

PY - 2009/1/1

Y1 - 2009/1/1

N2 - It is Quigley’s view that we should regard our own human bodies as our property. Wittgenstein’s famous comments about games and family resemblances are cited in support of this contention. She thinks that classification of bodies as property is significant and that it will help us to answer the ethical and political questions about how we should treat and be permitted to treat body parts, tissues and such like. This paper seeks to show that, although Wittgenstein’s comments about games and family resemblances might help us to think more clearly about the philosophical problem of universals, they do not lead one to imagine that bodies are property.

AB - It is Quigley’s view that we should regard our own human bodies as our property. Wittgenstein’s famous comments about games and family resemblances are cited in support of this contention. She thinks that classification of bodies as property is significant and that it will help us to answer the ethical and political questions about how we should treat and be permitted to treat body parts, tissues and such like. This paper seeks to show that, although Wittgenstein’s comments about games and family resemblances might help us to think more clearly about the philosophical problem of universals, they do not lead one to imagine that bodies are property.

KW - ethics

KW - philosophy

KW - essentialism

KW - nominalism

KW - human body

KW - Wittgenstein

U2 - 10.2174/1874761200903010028

DO - 10.2174/1874761200903010028

M3 - Article

VL - 3

SP - 28

EP - 31