Abortion marquis. Marquis vs. Thomson on Abortion Essay on Abortion 2023-01-05

Abortion marquis Rating: 4,4/10 1094 reviews

Abortion is a controversial and highly debated topic that has been at the forefront of public discourse for decades. In 1989, philosopher Don Marquis published an influential essay titled "Why Abortion is Immoral," in which he argued that abortion is morally wrong because it deprives the fetus of a valuable future. This essay will summarize Marquis's argument and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses.

Marquis begins his argument by stating that the moral wrongness of abortion lies not in the act of killing itself, but in the loss of a valuable future that the fetus would have had if it had been allowed to develop into a full-fledged person. He argues that all animals, including human beings, have a valuable future, and that this future consists of the various experiences, projects, and activities that make life worth living. When an animal's life is taken prematurely, this valuable future is lost, and this loss is what makes the act of killing wrong.

Marquis then goes on to argue that a fetus has a valuable future just like any other animal, and that this future is lost when the fetus is aborted. He points out that a fetus is a developing human being, with the potential to grow into a fully functioning adult with a rich and fulfilling life. When a fetus is terminated, this potential is never realized, and the valuable future that the fetus could have had is lost forever.

Marquis's argument has been highly influential and has been widely discussed and debated by philosophers and ethicists. One of the strengths of his argument is that it avoids the controversial question of when human life begins, and instead focuses on the value of a future that is lost when an animal's life is taken prematurely. This avoids the problem of trying to determine when a fetus becomes a person, which is a difficult and contentious issue.

However, Marquis's argument has also been criticized on several grounds. One of the main criticisms is that it relies on the assumption that all animals, including fetuses, have a valuable future that is lost when their lives are taken prematurely. Some philosophers have argued that this assumption is problematic, as it is not clear that all animals have a valuable future in the same way that human beings do. For example, it is not clear that a fetus has the same capacity for experiencing pleasure and pain, or for engaging in the same kinds of projects and activities, as a fully developed adult.

Another criticism of Marquis's argument is that it does not adequately address the issue of a woman's right to control her own body. Many proponents of abortion argue that a woman has the right to decide what happens to her own body, and that this right overrides any potential value that a fetus might have. Marquis's argument does not address this issue directly, and it is not clear how it could be reconciled with the idea that a woman has the right to control her own body.

In conclusion, Don Marquis's argument that abortion is wrong because it deprives the fetus of a valuable future is a significant contribution to the debate over abortion. While it has been influential and has helped to clarify some of the moral issues involved in abortion, it has also been criticized for its assumptions about the value of a fetus's future and its lack of consideration of a woman's right to control her own body. Ultimately, the question of whether abortion is morally wrong or not remains a complex and controversial issue that is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong by DON MARQUIS

abortion marquis

It would be as morally arbitrary to refuse to acknowledge that animal suffering is wrong as it would be to refuse to acknowledge that the suffering of persons of another race is wrong. The goods of life are what makes life worth living. This criterion appears plausible: The claim that all humans, whatever their race, gender, religion or age, have the right to life seems evident enough. The wrongness of killing us is understood in terms of what killing does to us. This account of the wrongness of killing is supported by the way it handles cases in which our moral judgments are settled.


Next

Marquis vs. Thomson on Abortion Essay on Abortion

abortion marquis

The great advantage of this contractarian approach to morality is that it seems far more plausible than any approach the anti-abortionist can provide. However, on rare occasions there is a defect in the screen and a peoples drifts its way in. Marquis argues that, because someone that desires to be euthanized has no enjoyable future, they are not bound by his argument and that killing them would not be immoral. These moves only stave off the difficulties with the pro-choice view; they do not resolve them. The baby is in the same situation as the mother in that, he did not choose to live inside of the mother.

Next

Don Marquis's View On Abortion

abortion marquis

In reply, one might argue that a pregnant woman's right to control her own body doesn't come to much if it is wrong for her to take any action that ends the life of the fetus within her. Feinberg Bel­mont, California: Wadsworth, 1973 , pp. Therefore, the right to life overrides the right to control one's own body and abortion is wrong. We believe that, in our own case and the cases of other adults and children, the loss of a future of value is a misfortune. In fairness, one must note that Thomson did not intend her strategy to generate a general moral permissibility of abortion.

Next

Don Marquis Abortion Analysis Essay Essay

abortion marquis

In the latter I die now. She supports such a prerogative by stating that the body is always delicate. The goods of life are whatever we get out of life. This task difficult, if not impossible. Thus, an analogy with animals supports the thesis that abortion is wrong. .

Next

Comparing the Views on Abortion of Thompson and Marquis Essay on Abortion

abortion marquis

On the one hand, a supporter of animals' rights might argue that since some non-human animals have a future of value, it is wrong to kill them also, or at least it is wrong to kill them without a far better reason than we usually have for killing non-human animals. Even though the suicidal have indicated that they want to die, medical personneI will act to save their lives. If you read the full text you clearly see that he shows the reasoning behind killing a full grown man and a fetus are the same. I agree that it does correspond with the argument that the violinist was attached to you unwillingly and the decision you have to make is similar, but it varies. He brings into the argument that what makes it wrong is the loss to friends and family, the degradation or wearing down and suffering that it causes the killer, and the loss of a future life. He believes this is the same as killing an adult human, which is considered immoral. Given that no fetus possesses the right to life, a woman's right to control her own body easily generates the general right to abortion.

Next

Summary and Critique of Don Marquis’ “Why Abortion is Immoral”

abortion marquis

Thus we believe that it is not wrong to remove a feeding tube or a ventilator from a permanently comatose patient, knowing that such a removal will cause death. Both the argument against abortion and the argument against causing pain to animals begin with a premise regarding what it is wrong to do to another person and the consequences of a wrong action. Thompson generally argues that there are cases where abortion may be morally permissible, due to the rights of the mother, while Marquis argues that abortion Is almost always morally wrong, except under extraordinary circumstances, because the fetus has a future life. Therefore, the anti-abortion premise would cover too many living things. Another reason for making these exceptions allow for those cases in which the permissibility of abortion is compatible with the argument of this essay. The fact that the pregnancy situation seems similar to the violinist case, Thompson states that no one is more ethically indebted to be attached to her fetus because of law.

Next

Arguments Against Don Marquis

abortion marquis

The violinist will die if you detach and do not allow him to use your body to filter his blood. It means that it is a human being, and every human being deserves to have a right to life. The deific system's extravagance was the source of every one of those gross errors. Accordingly, we can see that a contractarian defense of the pro-choice personhood syllogism fails. Compare the views of McInerney, 1990, and Shirley, 1995.

Next

Don Marquis "Abortion Is Immoral" Textual Analysis

abortion marquis

This argument is based on an account of the wrongness of killing that is a result of our considered judgment of the nature of the misfortune of premature death. Once disabused of imbecilic belief in God, it follows that the fetus has no more rank than nail clippings or the morning's bowel movement. I am going to talk about the reasons why certain pro-life parties believe Abortion is immoral and wrong. There is also a reply to this move. He gives the criteria for being a person is simply being identified as biologically human.


Next