Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but I actually don’t think I missed that point at all if you read to the end of my post.
The whole point is that I’m not certain that consequentialism is correct but that my internal probability of it being so has been sharply rising, which is why “as I’ve become more consequentialist in my thinking...it’s actually pushed me more and more pro-abortion”. The ‘more’ implies lack of certainty/conviction here both for my current and (especially) my past self.
I’m claiming that deontology broadly provides more of the anti-abortion arguments than consequentialism does, certainly in the popular space. So it’s reasonable for more consequentialist groups (like EAs) to be more pro-abortion.
If your only point is that people with greater degrees of consequence should be more pro-abortion, then I would agree. However, I interpreted your comment as also saying or implying that you were, in fact, pro-abortion, which is of course different (and I apologise if you didn’t imply this).
Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but I actually don’t think I missed that point at all if you read to the end of my post.
The whole point is that I’m not certain that consequentialism is correct but that my internal probability of it being so has been sharply rising, which is why “as I’ve become more consequentialist in my thinking...it’s actually pushed me more and more pro-abortion”. The ‘more’ implies lack of certainty/conviction here both for my current and (especially) my past self.
I’m claiming that deontology broadly provides more of the anti-abortion arguments than consequentialism does, certainly in the popular space. So it’s reasonable for more consequentialist groups (like EAs) to be more pro-abortion.
If your only point is that people with greater degrees of consequence should be more pro-abortion, then I would agree. However, I interpreted your comment as also saying or implying that you were, in fact, pro-abortion, which is of course different (and I apologise if you didn’t imply this).