The Link Between Biology And Psychology

Abortion’s legalization through Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade, has allowed for one in three pregnancies to end in abortion. This means that 1.5 million abortions are performed in the United States each year (Flanders 3). It ranks among the most complex and controversial issues, arousing heated legal, political, and ethical debates. The modern debate over abortion is a conflict of competing moral ideas and of fundamental human rights: to life, to privacy, to control over one's own body. Trying to come to a compromise has proven that it one cannot please all of the people on each side of the debate.

From these two notions stems three basic views, or platforms, individuals use as the backbone for their argument when making their case for the right or wrongness of abortion. Conservatives believe under no circumstance is it morally acceptable to perform an abortion. Liberals believe abortions are permissible at any time during pregnancy and for any reason. Lastly, moderates stand behind the notion that abortions are morally permissible in some situations but not all. Over time hundreds of philosophers have attempted to justify their view point with sound theories; three of which, Don Marquis, Michael Tooley and Judith Thomson, seem to have done so successfully.

The issue of abortion has always been a controversial one for citizens of the United States. Abortion is the practice of terminating a pregnancy after the embryo has been planted in the uterus (Abortion). An individual’s stance on this controversial issue categorizes them into one of two very different groups. An individual who feels that a woman should not have an abortion- due to moral or religious views- is said to be “pro-life”. Coincidently, those who feel that a woman should have the right to choose abortion are said to be “pro-choice”. “Pro-life” supporters point to the practice of abortion as an immoral one. Supporters state abortion is immoral because it takes away the rights of the unborn fetus, since activists consider human

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 has been one of the biggest controversies of all time. Many people believe that women should get to decide what she would do with her body. The definition of abortion is; “The termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo prior to being capable of normal growth”. Abortion is one of the most controversial topics today. Although there are two sides of the debate pro-choice and pro life, arguments are mainly centered around the Roe v. Wade decision, women’s rights and state restrictive laws.

The topic of abortion is one of the most controversial and sensitive for the society and myself. The debates and confrontations between two opposite groups of opinion are long and sometimes even brutal. Both sides have strong supporting arguments: pro-lifers base on moral principals, which is life before birth, while pro-choicers defend political and social rights, such as right to privacy and right of choice. Neither side can be absolutely right or wrong; basically it is a matter of personal opinion. Mine is that although the abortion is originally wrong, in many cases it must be a legal option.

Science tells us that from the moment of fertilization, a fetus is a human. Despite this, however, there is a swarm of controversy surrounding question, when does a fetus become a human? Many people believe that once a baby is conceived, it is considered a living human being. Many of these people believe that whether or not a fetus is a human is chiefly a scientific question. “The question as to when a human being begins is strictly a scientific question, and should be answered by human embryologists - not by philosophers, bioethicists, theologians, politicians, x-ray technicians, movie stars or obstetricians and gynecologists” (Irving). While Irving has a valid point in saying that whether or not a fetus is a human is a question mainly for

Jessica 's case is one of the mixed worldview of values on her unborn fetus where her moral compass is influenced by her materialism and spirituality akin to Marco. She follows both the theory that only sentient animals have moral status and the theory that all living organisms have moral status (Sebo, n.d.). According to Wilson (1994), “the fetus is entitled to some degree of moral respect, especially after it has developed for a few weeks”. For instance, Jessica is revealed as wavering between selecting what is erroneous and correct. She anticipates an improved socioeconomic life but similarly trusts that every life is consecrated.

Marquis begins his article by exploiting the fallacies of both the pro-choice and anti-abortion standard arguments. He states that anti-abortionist claims are often too broad while the pro-choice claims are often too narrow. The issue of ambiguity also arises on both sides of the argument. The anti-abortionist position becomes ambiguous if the wrongness of killing is based on a biological trait. Marquis explains that the color of ones skin, in the anti-abortionist view, is not a reason to not kill, whereas the trait of being a human being which consists of having 23 pair of chromosomes, would make it immoral to kill. Furthermore, pro-choice arguments are also ambiguous in that it is not clear what is considered a ‘person’ using psychological criteria. According to Joel Feinberg, a person is a conscious being with a sense of self and the ability to make rational decisions, set goals, and is in control of their own

The morality of induced abortion is one of the most controversial moral issues of our time. Abortion has grown to be one, if no the most, debated argument of modern times. In the following web-page, we will be discussing abortion in three of its major aspects: Public Opinion, Congress and Courts, and Interest groups.

Abortion is a legal medical method to stop the premature delivery that is adopted in most countries of the world. It was legalized many years ago but nowadays we live in the civilized society where the human life is the most precious treasure and the question about the appropriateness of abortions is of current importance. Nowadays there are two opposing camps who present their arguments. People who support abortion insist that prohibition of it will deprive people of their rights to have free choice. On the contrary, people who stand for banning abortion claim that abortion deprive a human being from the right to live. Every person must decide for himself what is more important: deprivation of choice or deprivation of life. Another point

When faced with the choice of life or death, most people would choose to live. In fact, most would not want someone else making that decision for them. They would claim that as a living and independent entity it is solely their choice as to whether they continue to live or not. While this concept may seem fairly straightforward, there seems to be some great debate when it is applied to abortion. For many, they will maintain that the fetus has the right to life no matter the situation. There are some who will argue that abortion is morally permissible in specific circumstances and there are even those that will claim that abortion is always permissible. Why is there such a great divide? A major factor that plays a part in this is whether abortion involves more than one life. Because determining the beginning point of life is such a complex and emotional debate, there will be the same allowance in this paper as there was in Judith Jarvis Thomson’s “A Defense of Abortion”. As she eloquently put it “I propose then, that we grant that the fetus is a person from the moment of conception” (p. 721). This will allow for a look into the moral debate of abortion from a more grounded stage. As discussed early in Thomson’s paper, most of the debate on abortion rests on whether the fetus is alive or not. Whereas the focus should be on the many other aspects of pregnancies that may lead to a mother wanting an abortion.

“On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion”, an essay written by Mary Anne Warren, defend abortion in any stage of a woman’s pregnancy (pg 468). Warren argues that the potential to become a human being is not the same as being human and deserving the same right to life (pg. 468-472). This essay asserts that in order to be human, one must possess five particular traits (pg. 470). These trait are consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, the ability to communicate, and awareness of oneself (pg. 470). Warren claims that since a fetus has not yet acquired all of the traits, then that fetus is not human and therefore does not have the right to life (pg. 470).

Many would argue that a fetus is a potential person because it is has the potential to become what it is not yet. However, does a potential person have potential rights? An example was used: does a potential doctor have the rights of a licensed doctor? When one is describing potentiality, All he is really describing is what that thing is not. By declaring that a fetus is a potential person, one is also stating that a fetus is not a person. As one can see, this issue of the essence of a person and whether a fetus is a person is a very complicated one. This becomes seven more complicated if one takes into account the issue of rights. Now, the concept of human rights, that is to say, what American society dictates as human rights, conflicts heavily with itself. On one hand, we form a deep and heavy opinion on one’s right to life. On the other, we hold an equally strong opinion on one’s freedom to live that life as they please. American society by and large has a firm belief in an individuals right to live. Therefore, if one comes to the conclusion that a fetus actually is a person, then that fetus should receive the protection to it’s right to live, as much as you or I. This society also holds the firm belief in one’s right to the sovereignty of his or her own body, equal to that of one’s right to live. In this case, it is imperative that we understand what liberties we can and cannot take upon ourselves

Is psychology a science? How does it differ from the traditional sciences? How is it similar?