which she deems morally impermissible (1396). In the Bystander at the Switch case, a bystander sees a trolley hurtling towards five workers on the track and has the option of throwing a switch to divert the trolley’s path towards only one worker. Thomson finds the Bystander at the Switch case permissible under two conditions: 1) first, that the same threat is diverted from a larger to a smaller group of people, and 2) second, that the means by which this threat is diverted does not in itself constitute
This paper aims to explore Judith Jarvis Thomson’s arguments mostly for abortion in her article “Judith Jarvis Thomson: A Defense of Abortion”, from Philosophy & Public Affairs Volume 1. She declares that abortion should be a provided choice because the mother has a right to her own body. She also believes that abortion should be morally permissible due to instances in which the future mother is placed under force and is unable to control the production of a child. Lastly, she further defends her
'A Defense of Abortion' by Judith Jarvis Thomson 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
Judith Jarvis Thomson successfully discusses and outlines in many cases that an abortion performed when the mother’s life is not threatened by the pregnancy would be not unjust. As some believe that the foetus is not an independent creature as it is inseparable from the mother’s body and the morality of abortion until the mother is part of the situation and being properly recognised. Thomas does recognise this as she believes that the mother’s rights over her body are key considerations. Thomson
The ethics of abortion is a topic that establishes arguments that attempt to argue if abortion is morally justified or not. Philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson wrote a pro- choice piece called “A Defense of Abortion.” In this paper, she presents various arguments that attempt to defend abortion by relating it to the woman carrying the fetus and her right in controlling her body. On the other side of the spectrum, philosopher Don Marquis wrote a pro- life paper called “Why Abortion Is Immoral.” Ultimately
The topic of my paper is abortion. In Judith Jarvis Thomson's paper, “A Defense of Abortion,” she presented a typical anti-abortion argument and tried to prove it false. I believe there is good reason to agree that the argument is sound and Thompson's criticisms of it are false. The typical anti-abortion argument is as follows: 1. Every fetus is a person, 2. Every person has the right to life, 3. Every fetus has the right to life [1,2], 4. Everything that has the right to life may not be killed,
In Judith Jarvis Thomson’s essay, “A Defense of Abortion,” she defends the right of a woman to have an abortion in certain circumstances. Even though she personally believes that a fetus should not be considered a person, she grants that it is for her argument. Thomson argues that abortion is morally permissible in some circumstances even when the fetus is considered a person. To help illustrate her point, she uses the violinist case in which an innocent person is hooked up to a famous violinist
This essay shall examine and critique 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 be not 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
In the Judith Jarvis Thomson’s paper, “A Defense of Abortion”, the author argues that even though the fetus has a right to life, there are morally permissible reasons to have an abortion. Of course there are impermissible reasons to have an abortion, but she points out her reasoning why an abortion would be morally permissible. She believes that a woman should have control of her body and what is inside of her body. A person and a fetus’ right to life have a strong role in whether an abortion would
In this essay I will be defending Judith Jarvis Thomson’s argument on `` A defence against Abortion``. In her argument she talks about how based on the situation a woman should be able to make a decision on her own whether she would want to keep the baby, or have an abortion, Thomson then stats that abortion should be legal, but only in some cases, she then stats her analogy. (Thomson, 1971, Page 48) “imagine this. You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious
“A Defense of Abortion” is a philosophy paper by Judith Jarvis Thomson in which the author argues for abortion, using several analogies to illustrate her points. In a move that separates this paper from the bulk of others on the same topic, Thomson grants at the start of the paper that a fetus has the right to life. She then proceeds to argue that although a fetus has a right to life, that right does not trump a woman’s right to her body. She concludes that abortion is an acceptable choice in a variety
This paper will address the ideas presented in Judith Jarvis Thomson’s paper, “A Defense of Abortion,” analyzing the argument involving the violinist and attempting to further emphasize how it justifies the moral permissibility of abortion. I intend to elaborate on the significance of her argument and its flexible parameters, explaining how even the variations have implications on the permissibility of abortion. In addition, I address the claims that Beckwith makes in regards to an unborn entity
arguments of both Don Marquis and Judith Jarvis Thomson, tearing them apart and evaluating them. Firstly, I would say the conversation between Marquis and Thomson would probably be a heated debate about the arguments used and how they counter each other. Thomson starts off by trying to write away the more “extreme views” with her hypothetical famous violinist argument, while Marquis begins with saying he won’t even touch these points. I believe most of the points Thomson goes over are the exact same ones
response based on his ethics to the arguments advanced on abortion by Judith Jarvis Thomson and Don Marquis in their essays, “A Defense of Abortion” and “An Argument that Abortion Is Wrong,” respectively. In Thomson’s article, “A Defense of Abortion,” Thomson argues that abortion is not impermis-sible because she agrees with the fact that fetus has already become a human person well before birth, from the moment of conception (Thomson, 268 & 269). Besides that, she also claims that every person has a
However, she disagrees with Warren on the point that abortion is always permissible. Thomson believes that there are certain circumstances in which abortion can be seen as unjustified, as she believes it would be morally indecent for a woman to get an abortion in the seventh month of pregnancy for the sole purpose of convenience, for example, because the due date conflicts with her vacation plans. Overall, Thomson believes that most abortions can be justified, but not if done for selfish reasons.
One of the most dominant articles on abortion is Judith Jarvis Thomson’s “A Defense of Abortion.” The article was written in 1971. In her article, Thomson defends the thesis that the impermissibility of abortion does not follow from the premises: that the fetuses are a person and that every person has a right to life. Thomson argues that even if the fetus is considered to be a person, the fetus’s right to life will not always outweigh the mother rights to decide what happens in and to her body. She
human; Marquis’ approach was more specific and unique. In his argument, Marquis criticized the conflicting sides of being too ambiguous or too explicit. However, his argument allowed for serious and credible objections. On the other hand, Judith Jarvis Thomson, another moral philosopher, spoke about abortion and the many exceptions that most people agree with. Marquis holds that: if it is a morally impermissible to kill and deprive someone of a “future-like-ours”, then it is wrong to abort and deprive
Abortion Abortion is a very touchy topic. There are so many different views on the issue. We will cover the views of two major ethical authors, R.M. Hare and Judith Jarvis Thomson. Also you will get to my opinions and views on the issue as well. In R.M. Hare’s essay he raises the question that all philosophers long the answer to, “ Is the fetus a person?”, Hare states that in most cases that question leads to a dead end. What we do know however, is that the potentiality of the fetus becoming a human
Personally, I believe that it is morally permissible for Tina to have an abortion due to her unfortunate circumstances. Tina’s situation would be acceptable by the principle of utilitarianism and the moderate viewpoints of Jane English and Judith Jarvis Thomson and unacceptable by the standards of Don Marquis’ Sanctity of Life theory and Immanuel Kant’s duty ethics. Reason 1 The first theory that supports Tina’s choice to get an abortion for the quality of life is Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill’s
self-consciousness, etc. "While many people agree that a day-old embryo does not have rights, most people agree that a fetus has rights on the day before it is born". Analyzing the following case: "In order to avoid pregnancy, Sue, a single 23-year-old Thomson believes that the abortion issue cannot be decided strictly by determining whether or not the fetus has a right to life. She argues that even if we grant that the fetus is a moral person (has the right to life), it is not always the case that abortion