Thomson, Warren, Marquis: Key Concepts in Abortion Ethics

What point is Thomson attempting to make with the case of the violinist?

Having a right to life does not grant someone the right to use another person's body for survival without their ongoing consent, even if that person's need is extreme.

What does the right to life entail according to Thomson?

It is the right not to be killed unjustly; it does not include a right to be given the bare minimum of what one needs for continued life if those resources belong to someone else.

What point is Thomson trying to make with the example of the burglar?

Opening a window for air does not give a burglar who enters the right to remain, just as engaging in intercourse with precautions does not grant a fetus the right to use the mother's body.

What does Thomson mean by a 'minimally decent Samaritan'?

A Minimally Decent Samaritan does the basic moral minimum, while a Good Samaritan goes far beyond duty at great personal cost; she argues women aren't legally or morally required to be 'Good Samaritans' if they don't want to carry a pregnancy.

Why is Thomson not arguing that a pregnant woman has the right to secure the death of the fetus?

The right to detach oneself from a body does not include the right to ensure the other being dies if it could survive independently after the detachment.

Why does Thomson grant that a fetus is a person in her argument?

She does this to show that even if personhood is granted, the right to life still doesn't justify the non-consensual use of another's body; she believes all persons have a right to life, but only a right to not be killed unjustly.

What does Thomson mean by the 'extreme view' of the impermissibility of abortion?

This refers to the position that abortion is impermissible even to save the life of the mother.

Explain Warren's distinction between biological and moral humanity.

Biological humanity refers to being a member of the human species, while moral humanity refers to being a person with moral rights; she argues only moral persons have a full right to life.

How does Warren respond to the implication that her view allows for infanticide?

She argues that once a child is born, it no longer violates the mother's rights, and killing it would be a needless destruction of a 'socially valued' entity.

What are the five capacities Warren uses to characterize 'personhood'?

Consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity to communicate, and self-awareness; she argues that a being does not need all five, but a fetus possesses none and is therefore not a person.

What reasons does Warren offer for why abortion may still be morally wrong?

It may be wrong if the abortion is performed late in the term for trivial reasons or if it causes unnecessary pain, though these do not override the mother's actual rights.

Why do we extend moral rights to human beings that do not possess the characteristics associated with personhood according to Warren?

We extend these rights as a 'social safeguard' to protect the stable functioning of society and because most of these individuals have the potential for, or have previously held, personhood.

Why is it wrong to kill adult humans according to Marquis?

It is wrong because it deprives the victim of all the experiences and enjoyments that would have constituted their future; since a fetus has a 'future like ours,' killing it is equally wrong.

How does Marquis respond to the objection that his view entails that contraception is wrong?

He responds that contraception is not wrong because there is no 'identifiable individual' being deprived of a future at the time of the act.

What does Marquis mean by the wrong of killing extending to some non-human animals?

To show that his theory is not 'speciesist' and that the wrongness of killing depends on the quality of the future being lost, regardless of species.

What is Marquis's anti-abortion principle?

It is prima facie seriously wrong to kill a human being, meaning that killing is 'at first appearance' a grave moral wrong that can only be overridden by extremely compelling moral circumstances.

What reasons does Marquis offer against the arguments that 'the life of a human being is sacred' or 'personhood' as foundations for arguing that abortion is morally wrong?

He claims the 'sacredness' argument is too religious/vague and the 'personhood' argument is too narrow, failing to explain why it's wrong to kill infants or the temporarily unconscious.

What does Marquis mean by a 'future like ours'?

This refers to a future containing experiences, projects, and pleasures that are valuable to the individual, similar to what a typical human adult or child enjoys.