Abortion is a considered a sensitive topic in society; as a result it is not frequently mentioned or discussed. However; Marquis has decided to voice his opinion on the matter.
Marquis believes abortion to be extremely immoral. However he mentions that there are exceptions in rare but certain circumstances where abortion is acceptable. We can infer that these instances would include situations that would put the mother or child at serious risk by keeping the fetus. He is frustrated that this idea has received minimal support recently. As a result he wants to influence change in society in hopes of receiving the support and publicity this topic deserves. Marquis’ primary argument stems from the idea of killing in general. He explains it is immoral to kill an adult because it prematurely deprives the human of something they may have valued at the time they were killed, as well as something they may had valued in the future. Although the victim may not realize it at the time of their death, they certainly had a valuable future ahead of them to experience which has been cut short. We are the only ones who can decide what is valuable to them; in this case we value some things more than others, and this concept differs from person to person. For example, in the present I value the life I am given and the opportunity I have to earn my degree at Villanova University while also valuing my future as well knowing that I have a chance to be successful in the future. Although I have not succeeded yet, I still value that opportunity I have and the life I’m capable of achieving through earning a degree. Therefore, he connects this same theory to the life of a fetus. By killing the fetus the result is the same, we are depriving it of its futur...
... middle of paper ...
... abortion in several ways. First off, he is in favor of euthanasia, he believes that a terminally ill patient should not have to suffer or endure more pain if there is no pleasure in that person’s life and their future holds nothing but suffering. Marquis states that although the victim may believe that their life is valuable to them and the thought of death is frightening, their future does not hold anything of value and will only bring them further pain and suffering. Although he says that euthanasia is not immoral, his stance on abortion still fits with his stance on euthanasia. On the topic of euthanasia, if the patient is thinking rationally, he believes the victim should not have to suffer if their future holds no further value. Therefore, his theories and ideas still apply to each idea while simultaneously ensuring they do not conflict with one another.
What is abortion? Abortion is killing a fetus inside a mother’s womb. According to Don Marquis, killing a fetus is morally impermissible. Marquis came up with an argument that views abortion as immoral and only in rare cases is it accepted. There are only a few rare cases that abortion is morally acceptable according to Marquis in his article, “Why Abortion is Immoral.” Marquis’s view on abortion is relatable because I am a woman and seeing as I am able to bare a child, I feel it is a women’s right to decide if abortion is permissible or not because it is her body and she has all the rights to her own body. Later described is FLO, one of Marquis’s arguments proving abortion is morally impermissible. I do not agree with the FLO argument. Marquis makes strong points, which can be agreeable, but in summary of Marquis’s arguments, he needs to have a more valid case of FLO.
Thus, Marquis’ argument for his pro-life view on abortion is flawed because one of his premises is not completely correct. Marquis argues that fetuses, children, and adults are all human beings and have the right to life. Also, Marquis says that losing one’s life is one of the worst things that can happen to a human being. So he technically declares that it is horrible to die, but not the worst thing to happen to someone. He starts out with the first premise about how the killing of a fetus deprives it of its potential future experiences.
A considerable difference is that Marquis’ beliefs are associated with the uncertainty of the future whereas Tooley’s beliefs are invested in the present. Tooley claims that because a fetus isn 't a fully capable person, a fetus is not afforded a merit in a decision such an abortion. Tooley’s argument is based solely on what the fetus is capable of before birth. Marquis’ argument is based on potential following birth. Marquis holds the value of a human future to a high regard. Marquis makes a profound point when he compares the refusal to kill suicidal teens to the anti-abortion position. He emphasizes that the reasoning for not killing suicidal teens is solely because the teen could possibly posses “the desire at some future time to live.” Thus, simply because one is not capable of desiring life does not mean one is not worthy of
Before Marquis lays down his argument, he proposes the problem in the traditional abortion debate. He explains that because both sides have syllogisms that are equally reasonable and unreasonable, the debate has become intractable, and therefore will continue to remain unresolved. He then begins to develop his argument by proposing the question “is killing wrong? Assuming both parties would agree that it is morally wrong to kill a human being, he explores the ultimate reason why it is wrong to kill; “The loss of one’s life deprives one of
Don Marquis’s opposes Tooleys view. He argues that abortion is, except possibly in rare cases, seriously immoral, and that it should be placed in the same moral category as killing an innocent human being (Marquis, 1989 p. 183). His belief is that killing someone is wrong because the victim suffers the greatest loss one can suffer, the loss of life. This loss deprives one of all experiences, activities, projects, and enjoyments that would have constituted as ones future (Marquis, 1989 p. 189). Marquis’s argument is summarised below;
Marquis cites the example of FLO (Future Like Ours). Marquis is highly persuasive using this FLO method because he uses emotional attachment comparing the life of a fetus to a life that we may experience. If we were aborted as a fetus, we would not have the life experiences we did. Marquis relates the life of a fetus to ours and tries to convince us as we would not want to be aborted, neither would the fetus. He cites that the only reason killing could be permissible is if we are killing in self defense, to save our own life. The FLO account of the wrongness of killing says that the loss of a future of value is a misfortune, making abortion
However, many people may understand Marquis’ argument to mean abortion is immoral because it causes the loss of life, which is not the argument that Marquis is presenting. To begin, the loss of life is merely a change in the status of the biological state. In other words, it is to go from alive- breathing, sentient, animate, to dead or passed away, lifeless. The loss of life is distressing not because of this change in state, but because of the effects of this change. That is to say, a loss of life results in a loss of future, which is not just a change in the biological state but a loss of future “experiences, activities, projects, and enjoyments that would otherwise have constituted one’s future” (321). This point is important to note as Marquis suggests that the primary reason for killing being wrongful is not due to the negative effects of the death on the victim’s family and friends. Rather, killing is wrongful because of its effect on the one who has been killed. According to Marquis, the greatest loss someone can suffer is the loss of their life as they will no longer be able to have a valuable future (321). Thus, the loss of a valuable future is so devastating that Marquis argues that almost all cases of abortion are prima facie
Marquis’s argument that it is immoral to kill, and abortion is wrong because it deprives one of a valuable future has a lot of problems in my eyes that does not make his view on anti-abortion solid. The lack of arguments that do not raise questions that seem to go unanswered make it hard to be persuaded to change a pro-abortionist mind or even be open to understanding where Marquis’s arguments lead. His “what if” argument leaves room for anyone opposing to “what if” in any direction which is not grounds for an effective argument and hurts Marquis’s because a lot of the questions go unanswered in his essay.
In my opinion, Marquis’ argument for why abortion is morally wrong has a couple of flaws, it’s biased towards the fetus and makes some unreasonable assumptions. Specifically, Marquis' account of why killing an adult human is wrong can potentially lead to some controversial conclusions. Marquis also doesn't consider any consequences on the lives of the potential parents of the fetus. Due to the nature of the topic of abortion, it really only applies to women who are thinking of getting an abortion, and as such, we cannot make the standard assumptions that we will have with normal fetuses. In this essay I will explain Marquis' argument, and try to show that his argument cannot conclude that abortion is morally wrong.
To conclude, Marquis’s argument that abortion is wrong is incorrect. Thomson gives many examples of why Marquis is wrong, including that the mother’s right to her body
His pro-life position is established without using personhood and religious premises. Marquis looks for a solid argument as to why abortion is immoral. Whether or not abortion is wrong we determine it based on what we identify the fetus as, Marquis says “whether a fetus is the sort of being whose life it is seriously wrong to end” (pg317) Pro-life people compare a fetus to a human, while pro-choice people argue that a fetus lacks any of the features that make the fetus a person that would support the argument that killing a person is wrong. He believes a fetus is a human being. Since, the arguments of whether or not a fetus is a human being go back and forth, he says, “in order to develop such an account we can start from the following unproblematic assumption concerning our own case: it is wrong to kill us.”(pg321) To be able to comprehend the wrongness in killing us we must understand what killing us actually does to us. Marquis states that killing us “imposes on us the misfortune of premature death. This misfortune underlies the wrongness.” Marquis argues that because the fetus has a human-like future it is immoral to abort the fetus. A human-like future suggests that the fetus has a future and has the potential to do things in its future life. To abort the fetus would be to deprive the person it would had eventually become from any future experiences,
Don Marquis primary argument lays on the fact that a fetus possesses a property, the possession of which in an adult human being is sufficient to make killing an adult human being wrong, makes abortion wrong (Gedge & Waluchow, 2012, p224). This property is the right to a valuable future. Marquis argument defends the position that abortion is morally wrong against pro-choice arguments, including the irrationality of a fetus, the lack of a fetus desire to live, and the fetus not being considered a victim.
In Marquis’ article, “An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong,” he says that abortion is seriously wrong. He sets out his argument about abortion in the beginning of the essay to prove why it is wrong. He claims that “abortion, except perhaps in rare instances, is seriously wrong (Marquis, 289).”
It is almost unanimously agreed upon that the right to life is the most important and sacred right possessed by human beings. With this being said, it comes as no surprise that there are few issues that are more contentious than abortion. Some consider the process of abortion as immoral and consisting of the deprivation of one’s right to life. Others, on the opposite end of the spectrum, see abortion as a liberty and a simple exercise of the right to the freedom of choice.
Abortion is an extremely controversial issue and one that is continually on the forefront of debates. Those who oppose the idea (Pro-lifers), thinks it is an act of woman playing “God” who live from who dies. Yet, whether an unborn baby constitutes a normal person is questionable; a pregnant woman, on the other hand, has the undeniable right to choose whether she wants to have a child or not. Therefore, the decision to have an abortion is the personal choice and responsibility of the woman, because prohibiting abortion impedes freedom of choice and endangers the physical and mental health of women.