1_Abortion debate topics by different philosophers

1_Abortion debate topics by different philosophers

• 1.
  Abortion
• 2.
  • Abortion isthe deliberate termination of a pregnancy. Depending on the point at which an abortion is performed, this procedure will result in the death of a zygote, embryo, or fetus.
• 3.
  • Viability isthe point at which a fetus can survive outside of the mother’s womb. Medical consensus is that twenty weeks after conception marks the earliest point at which a fetus can do this—and even then, most fetuses born this early will die, and most who survive will do so with severe impairments.
• 4.
  • Abortions canbe performed either surgically or medically. • The most common form is a surgical abortion, which involves inserting a thin, plastic tube into a woman’s uterus and suctioning the embryo or fetus out of the uterine lining with a vacuum pump. • Medical (i.e., nonsurgical) abortions occur when a woman takes a prescribed drug or mix of drugs that operate to expel the embryo or fetus from the uterus.
• 5.
  Argument Analysis • Muchof the debate about the morality of abortion has focused on whether a fetus is a human being. The Argument from Humanity 1. If the fetus is an innocent human being, then abortion is always (or perhaps almost always) immoral. 2. The fetus is an innocent human being. Therefore, 3. Abortion is always (or perhaps almost always) immoral.
• 6.
  • Problem: theterm human being is ambiguous—it has more than one meaning. • The result is that a lot of the discussions about the morality of abortion end up going nowhere. • On a biological account, a human being is any member of the species Homo sapiens. If being human is a biological concept, then premise 2 is clearly true, since fetuses of our species are certainly innocent of any wrongdoing.
• 7.
  • Problem: premise1 begs the question against pro-choice opponents. In other words, premise 1 assumes the truth of the conclusion it is meant to support. • It does not provide an independent reason for rejecting the pro- choice position. • If humanity is defined in purely biological terms, then the first premise needs a lot of defense—indeed, as much defense as the argument’s conclusion.
• 8.
  • Pro-choicers couldsay that the moral rule against killing innocents is not directed at all members of our species. • Rather, that moral rule is intended to protect persons: beings who are (at a minimum) rational, self-aware, possessed of emotions, able to reflect on the value of their experiences, and capable of communicating in original, sophisticated ways with one another.
• 9.
  • It’s easyto slide from a moral rule against killing persons to a moral rule against killing humans. • The point is rather to show how the Argument from Humanity involves an ambiguity about what is means to be a human being, and how that ambiguity makes real trouble for the argument
• 10.
  The Argument fromPotential 1. If the fetus has the potential to be a person, then it has the same moral status as a person. 2. Most fetuses have the potential to be a person. Therefore, 3. Most fetuses have the same moral status as a person. 4. A person’s moral status includes having a broad set of fundamental rights—including the right to life (the right not to be killed). Therefore, 5. Most fetuses have a broad set of fundamental rights—including the right to life. 6. If a fetus has a right to life, then aborting it is immoral. Therefore, 7. In most cases, abortion is immoral.
• 11.
  • Premise 1 •The best defense of this premise seems to be this general principle: (P) If X has the potential to be Y, then X has the same moral status as Y. But this principle is false. • A talented young actor may have the potential to become a star—that doesn’t by itself give him celebrity status. • A promising law student has the potential to become a judge—but she isn’t yet qualified to send people to jail. Unless some other, better support for premise 1 can be found, we should not regard the Argument from Potential as sound.
• 12.
  The Argument fromEnsoulment 1. It is immoral to kill any innocent being who has a soul. 2. All human fetuses are both innocent and have a soul. Therefore, 3. It is always immoral to kill a human fetus. • It’s true that some religious traditions believe that God has forbidden abortion—but many others reject this view. What evidence can be used to settle such a dispute?
• 13.
  The Infanticide Argument 1.If infanticide is immoral, so too is abortion. 2. Infanticide is immoral. Therefore, 3. Abortion is immoral. • There is a difference between an acorn and an oak, between day and night, between a dog zygote and a puppy, even if we are unable to identify a precise moment when one transforms into the other.
• 14.
  Thomson’s Argument fromAnalogy 1. If it is morally permitted to unplug from the violinist, then it is morally permitted to “unplug” from one’s fetus, that is, to terminate one’s pregnancy. 2. It is morally permitted to unplug from the violinist. Therefore, 3. It is morally permitted to terminate one’s pregnancy.
• 15.
  • In theviolinist case, like a case of pregnancy from rape, sustaining another’s life would be supererogatory: praiseworthy action that is above and beyond the call of duty. • The worry for Thomson’s argument is that the parallel between the violinist case and pregnancy appears to diminish once we are talking about pregnancy that arises from consensual sex.
• 16.
  • Opponents ofabortion are often content to cite the fetus’s humanity as grounds for restricting abortion, failing to acknowledge the ambiguity of the notion of “humanity” and the difficulties that beset the Argument from Humanity. • Citing a fetus’s potential to develop into a person is also a precarious basis for defending opposition to abortion. • Opponents of abortion have also sometimes relied on a line-drawing argument that cites the difficulties of identifying a point that distinguishes the newborn, who is assumed to enjoy a right to life, from a fetus at increasingly earlier staging of development. since it is structurally identical to other sorites arguments that are unsound, there is reason to think that this one is, too.
• 17.
  • Those whodefend a prochoice position have often assumed that the fetus is a nonperson and so is eligible for any treatment we care to give it. This would give us too much license to treat nonpersons in immoral ways. • The work of Judith Thomson has cast into doubt the idea that the morality of abortion hinges on whether the fetus possesses a right to life. • Her argument is strongest only where defending the permissibility of abortion in cases of rape