Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Thomson defense of abortion main argument
Thomson defense of abortion main argument
Thomson defense of abortion main argument
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Thomson defense of abortion main argument
ABORTION
Introduction
Abortion is one of the most argued premise. There are various diverse opinions about this procedure throughout, whether it is right or not, who gets to decide, if it is fair at all to decide who’s life is more valuable. We encounter arguments based on different scenarios and each has a justification to it. According to Thomson, J.J., “A Defense of Abortion” talks about many such scenarios. This essay aims to identify the relevant arguments that Thomson needs to provide and also evaluates whether Thomson 's actual arguments succeed in doing what 's needed.
Many consider that the fetus is a human being from its conception. A fetus acquires its human characteristics at quite an early stage of life. By the tenth week of gestatition the fetus already has a face, arms, fingers and toes, has developed its internal
…show more content…
The lady does not want a people seed to establish itself in her house, thus she even takes the measure to ensure herself with the best mesh screens. However if one discovers its way in, unwelcome as it might be, does the truth that the lady purposely gambled such an event when opening her window deny her the capacity to free her place of the intruder? Thomson notes argue the affirmative to this question, claiming that “...after all you could have lived out your life with bare floors and furniture, or with sealed windows and doors”.
In any case, by this rationale, she says, any woman could avoid pregnancy because of assault by essentially having a hysterectomy – a extreme method basically to defend against such a possibility. Thomson concludes that in spite of the fact that there might be times when the fetus has a right to the mother 's body, unquestionably much of the time the fetus does not have a right to the mother 's body. This analogy raises the issue of whether all abortions are unjust
Anger and heated debate have long fueled the controversy over abortion. Whether pro-life or pro-choice, both sides of the argument are convinced of the righteousness of their beliefs. There is, however, some confusion surrounding the term “pro-choice” – it does not directly pertain to the spread and use of abortion, but rather, “pro-choicers” advocate the continued legalization of abortion in order to make the choice available and to ensure that women’s fundamental rights are not subjugated. The stance that abortion should be available has its roots in economic concerns, psychological evidence, moral dilemmas, and the Constitution.
In her essay, “A Defense for Abortion,” Judy Jarvis Thomson primarily argues for the permissibility of abortion, due to rape, but it can be challenged by exposing flaws in her argument that relies heavily on analogy. However, objections to Thomson’s explanation fail to defeat her argument.
The topic on abortion gives a moral objection to a fetus’ right to life, while it is questionable whether or not the death of the unborn child is unjustifiable. Although it may seem as if abortion puts women in situations where it is necessary to save the mother’s life in some situations. Until both pro-life and pro-choice can come to a conclusion and an agreement, this debates on abortion will continually go on. Both sides need to be able to draw the line somewhere and balance each other’s weakness.
In this essay, I will hold that the strongest argument in defence of abortion was provided by Judith Jarvis Thompson. She argued that abortion is still morally permissible, regardless if one accepts the premise that the foetus is a person from the moment of conception. In what follows, I agree that abortion is permissible in the ‘extreme case’ whereby the woman’s life is threatened by the foetus. Furthermore, I agree that abortion is permissible to prevent future pain and suffering to the child. However, I do not agree that the ‘violinist’ analogy is reliable when attempting to defend abortion involving involuntary conception cases such as rape, whereby the foetus does not threaten the woman’s health. To achieve this, I will highlight the distinction
First I will prove premise 1, “Every fetus is a person,” true. The definition of person according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is "a human being." Now surely no one would regard a fetus as anything other than human such as a primate or dog. But some still might say, "Well, it isn't aliv...
In Judith Jarvis Thompson’s article “A Defense of Abortion” she explores the different arguments against abortion presented by Pro –Life activists, and then attempts to refute these notions using different analogies or made up “for instances” to help argue her point that women do have the right to get an abortion. She explains why abortion is morally permissible using different circumstances of becoming pregnant, such as rape or unplanned pregnancy.
This essay examines and critiques Judith Jarvis Thomson’s, A Defense of Abortion (1971). Thomson sets out to show that the foetus does not have a right to the mother’s body and that it would not be unjust to perform an abortion when the mother’s life is not threatened. For the sake of the argument, Thomson adopts the conservative view that the foetus is a person from the moment of conception. The conservative argument asserts that every person has a right to life. The foetus has a right to life.
The overall thesis that Thomson presents in “A Defence of Abortion”, is that abortion is permissible no matter the personhood status of the fetus. Their argument addresses various aspects of the issue: the rights of the fetus, the person pregnant with the fetus, how those rights interact with each other, third parties and moral obligation. They claim that the rights of a fetus are not any more important than the rights of the person pregnant. However, they also address cases where there is a sense of moral obligation not to have an abortion. Their discussion about third party participation can be used for other types of third party participation.
Abortion is an issue which separates the American public, especially when it involves the death of children and women. When an abortion occurs, the medical doctor removes the fetus from the pregnant woman. This particular act has separated the public. Many believe that abortion is not morally and ethically correct. On the other hand, some people believe that carrying and delivering the unborn child will hinder the safety of the mother, then an abortion is needed. Each view has its own merit in the debate. This debate has separated the public into two sections: pro-life and pro-choice. A pro-lifer opposes abortion, whereas, a pro-choicer believes that the decision to abort the child should be left to the mother because she is the one carrying the child. In this paper, there will be topics that will be discussed concerning pro-life and pro-choice. I hope at the end of this paper, the reader is able to gain more knowledge concerning each topic. Every woman has the right to control her own body.
Patrick Lee and Robert P. George’s, “The Wrong of Abortion” is a contentious composition that argues the choice of abortion is objectively unethical. Throughout their composition, Lee and George use credibility and reason to appeal the immorality of abortions. The use of these two methods of persuasion are effective and compels the reader to consider the ethical significance. Lee and George construct their argument by disputing different theories that would justify abortions. They challenge the ontological and evaluation theories of the fetus, as well as the unintentional killing theory. This article was obtained through Google, in the form of a PDF file that is associated with Iowa State University.
Abortion is an important and rather popular topic in the philosophical world. On one side of the argument, pro choice, Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that abortion is permissible because the pregnancy might not have been voluntary or the mother’s life is at risk if she continues on with the pregnancy. On the opposing side of the argument, Don Marquis argues that abortion is wrong because it takes away all the potential things a fetus could value in their future life. In this paper, I will argue against Don Marquis view of abortion. I will begin by explaining that Marquis does not take into consideration the effect the pregnancy may have on the mother, and I will talk about how Thomson does take the mother into consideration. Next, I will criticize
Thomson starts off her paper by explaining the general premises that a fetus is a person at conception and all persons have the right to life. One of the main premises that Thomson focuses on is the idea that a fetus’ right to life is greater than the mother’s use of her body. Although she believes these premises are arguable, she allows the premises to further her explanation of why abortion could be
In the article 'A Defense of Abortion' Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that abortion is morally permissible even if the fetus is considered a person. In this paper I will give a fairly detailed description of Thomson main arguments for abortion. In particular I will take a close look at her famous 'violinist' argument. Following will be objections to the argumentative story focused on the reasoning that one person's right to life outweighs another person's right to autonomy. Then appropriate responses to these objections. Concluding the paper I will argue that Thomson's 'violinist' argument supporting the idea of a mother's right to autonomy outweighing a fetus' right to life does not make abortion permissible.
One of the most disputed subjects into day’s society is abortion. Children have been sacrificed by millions of women all across the world. There’s always a powerful urge to vindicate the suffering, emotional pain, and deprivation by the mother and her significant other. Therefore, in any debate, you will run up against an invisible brick wall. Which means even the greatest Knowledge will neglect to influence. When it comes to abortion the best way to tackle the subject is through facts. Some of the wondrous arguments stem from the law, science, and the rights women have to aid the pro-life case opposed to abortion.
In A Defense of Abortion (Cahn and Markie), Judith Thomson presents an argument that abortion can be morally permissible even if the fetus is considered to be a person. Her primary reason for presenting an argument of this nature is that the abortion argument at the time had effectively come to a standstill. The typical anti-abortion argument was based on the idea that a fetus is a person and since killing a person is wrong, abortion is wrong. The pro-abortion adopts the opposite view: namely, that a fetus is not a person and is thus not entitled to the rights of people and so killing it couldn’t possibly be wrong.