Hudson Rose 6/8/24 In this essay, I will discuss the topic of abortion, focusing on Don Marquis's philosophy on why abortion is immoral. Don Marquis argues that abortion is wrong because it deprives the unborn child of a future filled with experiences, activities, and enjoyment, thereby taking away their right to live. I will explore Marquis's claims and the moral implications he presents, introduce my own objections to his argument, and evaluate whether these objections are sufficient to disprove his stance. One of the premises that Marquis brings up is how morally wrong unless in extreme circumstances causes a loss of a valuable future. His argument goes like this: It is morally wrong to cause the loss of a valuable future, abortion causes …show more content…
One of the main arguments of pro-choice activists is that fetuses aren’t considered proper human beings and can’t determine morality, so it isn’t morally wrong to kill them. “It is always prima facie wrong to take a human life” is the main point, which is hard to argue against. Marquis says,” We do treat being both living and human as having moral significance.”, however, Marquis’s argument doesn’t include anything about humanity; he describes killing anything with a future like ours as morally wrong. So whether or not a fetus is considered a fully human is out of the question. Fetuses have the opportunity to have a future, and killing it prevents them from realizing this future. Even if they can’t appreciate or choose their future is debunked in Marquis’s argument as people who are depressed might want to end their life, but we value their life and all agree that it would be morally wrong to allow them to end their life. Marquis’s argument is rock solid, and not many people can find any apparent fallacies that could combat his argument. However, I believe that I have an argument that does combat Marquis’s premise. Marquis’s premise states that it is prima facie wrong to prevent the loss of a future like ours, which could
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.
Don Marquis is a philosopher arguing that any form of abortion is immoral. His original thesis states: In the overwhelming majority of cases, deliberate abortions are seriously immoral. He begins by stating why killing is wrong in three statements. He states, “killing is wrong because it brutalizes the killer, it is a loss to others, and it robs the victim of all the experiences, activities, projects, and enjoyments that would otherwise have constituted one’s future” (68). The first two statements do not address the fetus, but the last statement is very arguable, so Marquis emphasizes his argument on this premise. Depriving anybody of their future has many consequences. Some parts of a person’s future are valued now and some parts could be valued later. Therefore, it is wrong to kill any adult human because it is a loss of future (which has value). He addresses the questions of personhood by stating that fetuses have the potential to be humans. Therefore, killing a fetus is depriving the fetus of having a
There are many factors that are taken into consideration when determining if abortion is morally permissible, or wrong including; sentience of the fetus, the fetuses right to life, the difference between adult human beings and fetuses, the autonomy of the pregnant woman, and the legality of abortion. Don Marquis argues that abortion is always morally wrong, excluding cases in which the woman is threatened by pregnancy, or abortion after rape, because fetuses have a valuable future. Mary Anne Warren contends that late term abortions are morally permissible because birth is the most significant event for a fetus, and a woman’s autonomy should never be suspended.
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.
In this paper I will discuss Don Marquis’s essay “Why Abortion is Immoral” and Judith Jarvis Thomson’s objections to Marquis’ argument against abortion.
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 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 can 't 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.
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.
In Dan Marquis’ article, “Why Abortion is Immoral”, he argues that aborting a fetus is like killing a human being already been born and it deprives them of their future. Marquis leaves out the possible exceptions of abortion that includes: a threat to the mom’s life, contraceptives, and pregnancy by rape. First, I will explain Marquis’ pro-life argument in detail about his statements of why abortion is morally wrong. Like in many societies, killing an innocent human being is considered morally wrong just like in the United States. Second, I will state my objection to Marquis’ argument through examining the difference between a human being already born future compared to a potential fetus’s future. Thus, Marquis’ argument for his pro-life
Is an egg chicken or an egg? How many of you had asked this question when you were little?
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
In this paper I will be arguing in favor of Judith Jarvis Thomson view point on abortion. I am defending the use abortion and only in the first trimester. I will consider Don Marquis objections of the practice but ultimately side with Thomson.
The word abortion brings out a variety of attitudes & perceptions amongst people. The topic is surrounded by emotion and empathy, which often creates a divide, those who view abortion as permissible and those who do not. In “Bioethics Before Birth," Tooley and Marquis provide their arguments on abortion. Their arguments share some similarities but their viewpoints and delivery set them apart. I will evaluate and compare the differences and similarities in their arguments.
Why Abortion is Immoral by Don Marquis is an essay that claims that abortion is morally wrong, and uses one argument in particular to explain why. He argues that many of us would agree that it is wrong to kill a human, and if you believe that then you should also have that view on abortions. If you think killing is wrong then you think all killing is wrong and the persons biological state, whether it is when a person is a fetus, one years old, or thirty years old, makes no difference. He then explains that killing is wrong not only because it is immoral, but wrong because it deprives the victim of life and the enjoyments one would have otherwise experienced; which Marquis believes is the greatest lost one can suffer (Marquis, 189). Given certain circumstances Marquis agrees there are cases where killing is acceptable, but nonetheless it is immoral.
Morals of Abortion Abortion is a very complex and moral issue that sparks numerous debates in regard to the identities, rights, and worth of the lives of women. Don Marquis and Mary Ann Warren, each having their moral framework regarding abortion, avail extremely divergent views regarding the morality of abortion. The theory stipulated by Warren compares the moral prestige of a newborn from an extensive viewpoint, emphasizing women's autonomy and personality values (Warren, 1973). Marquis, on the other hand, emphasizes the perspective that abortion is the result of the fetus's intrinsic loss of well-being and intelligence, hence demonstrating that human beings have a moral duty to preserve life (Marquis, 2006). This essay closely analyzes the
In the short story “Civil Peace” by Chinua Achebe, Jonathan Iwegbu, portrays many positive and negative character traits, including these: He is grateful, optimistic, but also self-serving or defiant. Jonathan Iwegbu, his wife, and 3 of 4 of his children were survivors of the Nigerian Civil War and considered themselves extremely lucky; their home and other valuable items were salvaged and still-standing. Through Jonathan, the author is trying to communicate a theme or central point, which is that materialistic items don’t compare in importance to family or your state of being. One strength that Jonathan portrays is that he remains grateful and optimistic of the many advantages he received.