people seeds

Flavia Neyra
People Seeds

Thomson’s “People Seeds” thought experiment illustrates a situation where we can imagine that people are like seeds drifting in the air like pollen. One of these seeds can simply drift into people’s houses when they open the window and take root in their carpets. If they don’t want any of these people seeds then they can easily fix their window by buying the best fine mesh to cover it. However, as it does happen, one window’s screen mesh is defective and a seed gets in. Now, does the person plant that develops in the house have the right to use the house? This question can be approached in many ways and have numerous answers. However, I will be discussing the way that Kant, an ethical philosopher, would approach such question by using his theory of categorical imperative. I will also explain the problem of the situation and my opposing view towards Kant’s responses.
The situation above is describing the view of abortion. Thomson is using the idea of the mesh window as contraception. The situation mentions that people can buy the best mesh for their window to protect their house from the seeds. In the same sense, people buy the best contraception to prevent them from getting pregnant. However, nothing is guaranteed, so the seed ends up getting into the house by a defective mesh on the window. This also happens in life, when contraception fails and gets a woman pregnant. The question being proposed is “Does the plant that develops in the house have the right to use the house?” In other terms, “Does a fetus have the right to be in the mother’s womb or can a mother choose to not have the fetus?”
Kant argues the idea of a categorical imperative, which all humans should choose good acts based on a univers...

... middle of paper ...

...erative is inconsistent. Categorical imperative determines what you should do regardless of the ends. Doing an act without an end is pointless. Everyone aims for end to make choices. For example, people make choices based on what makes them happy. Happiness is an end that people aim towards. Without this end, people would have no purpose do anything. Therefore, there must ends in order to make choices and not because we should do them as Kant theory states.
Having a choice of an abortion is a decision many women make everyday. Kant’s categorical imperative is only one view to look upon this situation. By stating an unconditional should statement and passing the universal liability test determines if the act is good. According to Kant, the act of abortion would be immoral. However, I believe that Kant fails to explain the ends to why we should do the things we do.