Defense of abortion

Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion," written in 1971 is one of the most read and talked about articles on abortion. It was written at a time that for the most part everyone was against abortion. One way to get people who were generally pro-life due to religious beliefs to read her article was to find a common ground. After finding and addressing the common ground as a premise, Thomson finds a way to support abortion with original arguments. Although she does have clever points, abortion is a topic that

essay, A Defense for Abortion, philosopher Judith Thomson uses a thought experiment involving a rapidly growing baby threatening to crush a woman’s life, to support her primary conclusion that abortion is morally permissible. Thomson’s commentary to this thought experiment also supports another one of her conclusions: third parties are morally permissible in performing abortion. In this paper, I will also answer the question of the moral permissibility of third party performed abortions with the

In her article “A Defense Against Abortion,” Judith Jarvis Thomson explores the permissibility of abortion through both the rights of a fetus and of a woman, and further argues that abortion is sometimes permissible under circumstantial situations. Thomson offers multiple thought-experiments, but the one I am focusing on in my paper is her burglar-based argument. In short, this situation involves you leaving your window open, knowingly increasing the risk of a burglar entering your home. She further

value. However, the conclusion that follows, that having an abortion is as wrong as killing an innocent adult, is not sound. Marquis neglects important considerations that make these actions morally distinct, and is therefore guilty of using a false analogy. Arguably the most morally relevant difference between these individuals, is that an adult is an autonomous being, whereas a fetus is fully dependent on the mother. Therefore, abortion is a two-person issue, and as such, we cannot evaluate a singular

if she did not have an abortion. In such circumstances, the woman’s right to self-defence outweighs a fetus’ right to life, however I would not allow that the mother’s right outweighs the fetus’ if the mother wanted to have an abortion of convenience because this denies the child of possible future experiences. Firstly, I will outline Judith Jarvis Thomson’s argument for self-defence. In her article, ‘A Defense of Abortion’, Thomson provides an analogy in favour of abortion. She asks the reader to

Judith Jarvis Thomson argues in “A Defense of Abortion” that abortion in cases of rape is acceptable because of the element of coercion. She makes a preliminary assumption that the foetus has a right to life, but she argues that this right to life does not necessarily include the right not to be killed. She makes this argument in large part through a particularly vivid analogy of an unconscious violinist. Thomson claims that the analogy defends abortion in cases of rape by showing that if a woman’s

Judith J. Thomson an American philosopher wrote an interesting take on the right of a women receiving an abortion in her piece called “A Defense of Abortion”, written in 1971. “A Defense of Abortion” for Judith, the piece is one of her most recognized works. On top of being one of her most famous pieces, “A Defense of Abortion” could possibly be the most famous piece on abortion in philosophical history as of the current date. Judith J. Thomson was an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at Massachusetts

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

'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

In “A Defense of Abortion” written by Judith Jarvis Thomson, the author analyzes premises for which she believes that abortion should be permissible, but argues in some cases abortion should also not be allowed. Her analysis is different from most papers on this subject, because she immediately throws the argument of if the fetus is a person out the window. She calls it a “slippery slope argument”(Thomson 54). Thomson, instead, presents that a fetus does have the right to life, but she uses thought