Erick89

Hello, Frequent reader, seldom poster here. I have a college paper I'm working on which argues that Henry James's novella The Turn of the Screw must be read in the context of his literary style, Naturalism, to unfold the ambiguity of the tale. I want to summarize the Naturalist method, but am having difficulty. So do Naturalist depict individuals qua groups -- or -- groups qua individuals? It seems like two sides of the same coin, so the only real difference may be the perspective. Any help is appreciated.

Hello everyone, I had some questions regarding the Objectivist positions on abortion and the rights of the fetus/child that I was hoping someone could clarify. At what point, from conception to adulthood, does a person attain their rights (or, at least the most basic right to life)? I do see how a fetus is not afforded rights within the first trimester, since it is at that point little more than matter and, therefore, afforded no more rights than an animal; however, at some point during prenatal development, is it not afforded the right to life? (I don't mean to diminish the woman's right, and could certainly see how, if her life were in jeopardy from pregnancy, an abortion would be entirely morally permissable.) I have read all the Objectivist non-fiction and agree with it, but have not heard any convincing argument by Rand that the rights of the mother supercede that of the unborn. Thanks for your replies.