A Defense Of Abortion Essay

The next issue is, in Thomson’s opinion, the most important question in the abortion debate; that is, what exactly does a right to life bring about? The premise that “everyone has a right to life, so the unborn person has a right to life” suggests that the right to life is “unproblematic,” or straight-forward. We know that isn’t true. Thomson gives an analogy involving Henry Fonda. You are sick and dying and the touch of Henry Fonda’s hand will heal you. Even if his touch with save your life, you have no right to be “given the touch of Henry Fonda’s cool hand.” A stricter view sees the right to life as more of a right to not be killed by anybody. Here too troubles arise. In the case of the violinist, if we are to “refrain from killing the violinist,” then we must basically allow him to kill you. This contradicts the stricter view. The conclusion Thomson draws from this analogy is “that having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given the use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another person’s body—even if one needs it for life itself.” This argument again proves the basic argument wrong. The right to life isn’t as clear of an argument as I’m sure opponents of abortion would like it to be or believe it is.

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 person's right to autonomy. Then appropriate responses to these objections. Concluding the paper I will argue that Thomson's "violinist" argument supporting the idea of a mother's right to autonomy outweighing a fetus' right to life does not make abortion permissible.

In her article, “The Defense of Abortion”, Judith Jarvis Thomson states an analogy involving a violinist. She first states that you are allowed to unplug yourself in the violinist scenario, second abortion after rape is analogous to the violinist scenario, therefore, you should be allowed to unplug yourself and be allowed to abort after rape (Chwang, Abortion slide 12). In this paper, I will argue that abortion is morally acceptable even if the fetus is considered a person. This paper will criticize premise two from the traditional argument against abortion string that killing innocent persons is wrong (Chwang, Abortion slide 9). Following the violinist analogy will be an objection to this analogy and my respons to them. One of the

In Thomson’s two arguments about rape and failure of contraceptive she has some points that are in fact true and not much can be questioned. In her first argument about rape, it makes sense to say that if someone were to use your body against your will and you have no say about it and be and you are forced to be stuck without a choice to get up and disconnect yourself even if it does kill the famous violinist is wrong. But when you deprive someone of their life it can’t be seen to be correct in any case. Thomson’s first premise is in fact true and gives her argument against rape logical strength. Both the violinist and the fetus are using the person’s body

In Thomson’s defence of abortion she argues that abortion is permissible when a mother’s life is not at risk. Working on her interpretation of the secular conservative argument, she first assumes that the premise of a foetus being a person is true, then moves onto the second premise, that a person has the right to life. Analysing what the right to life means, she first looks at the idea that the right to life is the right to have the bare minimum a person needs in order to survive. She quickly rebuts this by providing the Henry Fonda analogy and the violinist analogy. Both of these show that just because a person needs something to survive, like Henry Fonda’s cool hand or another person’s kidneys, a person doesn’t have the right to take it. With this in mind she modifies the argument so that the right to life is the right not to be killed. This she rebuffs with the violin analogy, noting that by pulling the plugs you would in effect be killing the violinist. While the violinist didn’t have the right to your kidneys, it could be argued that he does have the right for you not to intervene. However these are your kidneys, and you should not be forced to allow him continued use. Having ascertained that the right to life is not the right to the bare minimum needed to survive, nor the right not to be killed, she concludes that the right to life is the right not to be killed unjustly, or the

Thomson’s argument, “A Defense on Abortion,” is a piece written to point out the issues in many arguments made against abortion. She points out specific issues in arguments made, for example, about life beginning at conception and if that truly matters as an argument against abortion. Thomson uses multiple analogies when making her points against the arguments made against abortion. These analogies are used to show that the arguments made do not really make sense in saying it is immoral to have an abortion. These analogies do not work in all cases, and sometimes they only work in very atypical cases, but still make a strong argument. There are also objections made to Thomson’s argument, which she then replies to, which makes her argument even stronger. Her replies to these arguments are very strong, saying biology does not always equate responsibility, and that reasonable precaution is an important factor in the morality of abortion. There are some major issues in her responses to these objections.

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 person's right to autonomy. Then appropriate responses to these objections. Concluding the paper I will argue that Thomson's 'violinist' argument supporting the idea of a mother's right to autonomy outweighing a fetus' right to life does not

Judith Jarvis Thomson argues that there are defenses of abortion and that the right to life is not an absolute right; therefore in some cases abortion is morally permissible (265). In order to argue this, Thomson outlines the relevant steps that help form her argument. One, every person has a right to life. Two, the fetus is considered a person. Three, the fetus therefore has a right to life. Four, the fetus’ right to life is stronger than the mother’s right to bodily integrity. Thus saying, abortion is impermissible. Provided recently by the relevant steps and the thought that all these conditions are intriguing, it helps lay out the main topic for her argument. Thomson’s essay is examining and arguing

In “Are Pregnant Women Fetal Containers?” Purdy acknowledges her philosophical outtake on abortion by entertaining the idea of why should the child’s welfare outshine the wellbeing of the mothers own health claiming that the child is a part of that individuals body and not its own. In “A Defense of Abortion”, Thomson begins her article discussing the permissibility of abortion on whether certain circumstances can make it morally correct on the basis of whether or not the baby is an actual person and the conditions of a situation. In Purdy’s article she administers the concept of the fetus not truly having individual rights because we have not developed a concrete belief on if the fetus is considered human or not. Thomson argues that the fetus should be considered a human at the moment of conception because every person has a “right to life”. The dilemma is whose life is more valuable than the other. Thomson states that a person’s life outweighs a women’s right to decide what happens in and to her body (Thomson 41) and in contrast Purdy

In Judith Jarvis Thompson’s article “A Defense of Abortion” she explores the different arguments against abortion presented by Pro –Life activists, and then attempts to refute these notions using different analogies or made up “for instances” to help argue her point that women do have the right to get an abortion. She explains why abortion is morally permissible using different circumstances of becoming pregnant, such as rape or unplanned pregnancy.

A fetus at an early age, in Thomson’s eyes, is not considered a person. However, Thomson decides to go beyond just this basic pro-choice argument and analyzes abortion as if it were a moral living person. She argues for and against several different claims that bring about controversy still to this day. To understand Thomson’s argument, we must first know how she interprets the idea of having a right to life. We can view life in two different spectrums.

In her "A Defense of Abortion," Judith J Thomson argues, for the sake of argument, (1) that fetuses are people, (2) people have a right to live, (3) fetuses have a right to live, (4) the right to life always outweighs the right to decide what to do with one's body, (5) abortion violates the fetus' right to life. Thomson's essay primarily focuses on premise four. She comes to the conclusion that right to life does not always outweigh the right to decide what to do with one's body. Thomson uses various examples to support her argument against premise four.

Judith Jarvis Thomson proposes her argument in her article, A Defense of Abortion. There, she explains to her readers during what circumstances is abortion justifiable. Thomson uses the argument by analogy strategy to explain to her readers her argument. She tries to reach her conclusion by comparing it to similar cases. The point she is trying to make is to tell her readers that abortion is morally permissible only in some cases, like when the mother has been a victim of rape, when contraception has failed or when the pregnancy is of danger to the mother. She explains to her readers that abortion is justifiable only in some cases, not all. Thomson uses the case of a violinist to show her readers that abortion is morally permissible when a woman has been victim of rape. She also uses the people seeds story as an analogy to explain that abortion is morally acceptable when contraception has failed. Thomson also mentions the right to life in her article. She uses the right to life to explain to us that it is morally justifiable for the mother to abort the fetus when the fetus is endangering the mother’s life. In order to help her readers understand the notion of right to life she is trying to propose to us, she does so by using the Henry Fonda example. In my point of view, I find most of Thomson’s analogies irrelevant to the argument she is trying to make. I will explain to my readers why I find Thomson’s analogies irrelevant.

The argument that Thomson is trying to make is that abortions are permissible, but not always. She says that there will be cases in which carrying the child to term requires at least Minimally Decent Samaritanism of the mother and this is a standard we must not fall below (184). What Thomson is trying to say is that mothers should assume responsibility for their child, but they often won’t because they feel like it’s a huge sacrifice. Killing the fetus shouldn’t be an option. Also, killing the fetus is equivalent to killing an innocent person because killing the fetus violates its right to life same as any other individual (180).

Judith Thomson defends abortion by first assuming all fetuses have a right to life, and then by giving exceptions to permit abortion. These exceptions include the mother’s life being at risk, rape, incest, ignorance of how you become pregnant, and contraceptive failure, which all in her opinion relieves you of the responsibilities of pregnancy, making it permissible to abort the fetus. To help defend her argument, Thomson uses a variety of interesting analogies.