In classical philosophy, it is a point of perplexity, where a combination of axioms and/or propositions (each true in their own right) are found to be incompatible. Contemporary ethics is constantly faced by such situations: consider the conundrum posed by the notions of the âright to lifeâ and the âfreedom to chooseâ in the case of abortions. Taken on their own, most people would support the notion that everyone has a right to life and a right to the freedom to choose how they live that life. In the case of abortion, the proper allocation of these rights is difficult to determine with any precision. Faced with such vexed issues as this, many commentators find themselves resorting to the second meaning of aporia, which in rhetoric refers to figures of speech in which the speaker expresses self-doubt, e.g. âI really donât know how to decide between these two rights, but I will nonetheless endeavour to do soâ. In the work of Derrida, Jacques aporia is a central concern: it is a basic point of the deconstruction method that any text, indeed any statement, can be shown to consist of a multiplicity of aporias.