A

Abortion Intro

  • Abortion: The Issue

    • Abortion as a topic involves distinguishing between what is legal and what is moral.

    • Relationship between legality and moral status: legality does not always track moral status, and vice versa.

    • Developmental concepts (basic terms to know):

    • Egg, sperm, fertilization, zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, etc.

    • Uniqueness of the problem: abortion raises distinctive moral questions not identical to other life-and-death choices.

  • Possible positions on abortion (categories of permissibility)

    • Always wrong

    • Always permissible

    • Sometimes wrong, sometimes permissible

    • Very wide range of views in the 3rd category (i.e., sometimes wrong, sometimes permissible)

  • Problems for each position

    • For “Always wrong”: complications with cases like later-stage abortions or threats to the pregnant person’s life; infanticide issues can inform critiques

    • For “Always permissible”: objections about potential harm, moral status of the fetus, and social/ecological consequences; concerns about equality and value of potential life

    • For “Sometimes wrong, sometimes permissible”: requires criteria to determine when it is permissible; leads to debates over autonomy, moral status, and the weight of potential life

    • Infanticide (as a related test case): sometimes yes/no or context-dependent; used in thought experiments about moral status and the moral community

  • Vagueness and development across the early life sequence

    • Zygote → 6 months → Newborn infant (range across developmental stages)

    • Sorites Paradox: vagueness about when life gains moral status or significant moral weight

  • Philosophical tools and approaches used in the abortion debate

    • Act Utilitarians and Rule Utilitarians

    • Kant (duty, moral law, and respect for persons)

    • Variations in how theories apply to abortion

    • Ends/Means distinction (how outcomes relate to moral rules)

    • Zygotes, etc. and autonomy: how autonomy relates to the moral status of early-stage entities

    • Universalization: applying a rule or principle to all similar cases

    • Thought experiments (Intuition Pumps): used to probe intuitions and test principles

    • Defined uses of key terms; be wary of relying too heavily on intuition

    • Extreme case (voting rights): used to test the implications of moral principles in extreme scenarios

    • Some concepts essential to the debate: moral status, moral community, autonomy, person vs human being, potentiality

    • Recall AU (Act Utilitarian) and Kant on the “moral community”

    • Core concepts to understand: Human being vs. person; Potentiality; Moral status

  • Moral status and related concepts

    • Moral status: what makes something count in moral decision-making

    • Recall AU and Kant on the “moral community”

    • Human being vs. person: distinctions often argued about in these debates

    • Potentiality: whether potential life holds moral weight comparable to actual life

  • Connections and implications

    • Connections to foundational principles in ethics (autonomy, rights, utility, universalizability, respect for persons)

    • Ethical implications for pregnancy, motherhood, and medical decision-making

    • Practical implications for law, policy, and clinical practice

  • Active topics on page 2: Autonomy, rights, and moral status (see section below)

  • Key terms and religious/philosophical references to understand

    • Autonomy: self-governance, capacity for self-determination

    • Moral status: degree to which an entity deserves moral consideration

    • Moral community: group of beings to whom moral duties and considerations apply (as per Kant and related discussions)

    • Potentiality: capacity to develop into a morally relevant state or being

    • Intuition Pumps: thought experiments designed to elicit intuitions for ethical reasoning

    • Ends/Means: ethical evaluation of actions by their outcomes vs. the intrinsic value of the actions themselves

    • Universalization: testing principles by imagining them applied universally

  • Notable positions and thinkers (from Page 1 notes)

    • Marquis: General view (on the wrongness of killing, importance of future-like ours)

    • Thomson: General view (famous thought experiments about abortion, e.g., the violinist analogy)

    • Tooley: General view (questions about the moral status of beings with desire or interests)

    • Kant: General approach (duty, respect for persons, autonomy)

    • Act Utilitarian: Focus on actual consequences of actions

    • Rule Utilitarian: Focus on rules that maximize utility in the long run

  • Practical takeaways for study

    • Be able to summarize how legality and morality can diverge in abortion debates

    • Be able to explain why developmental stages and vagueness matter (z-
      ygotes to newborns) and how the Sorites paradox applies

    • Understand how major ethical theories (Act/Rule Utilitarianism, Kant) would analyze abortion differently

    • Know the ends/means distinction and how it might apply to abortion policy decisions

    • Recognize the role of autonomy, reciprocity, and moral status in arguments

    • Familiarize with main theorists and their positions (Marquis, Thomson, Tooley, Kant) and how they relate to the concept of the moral community

  • Page 2 focus: Active vs. Passive, rights, and moral status

    • Active vs Passive Killing: distinctions in moral status considerations and the permissibility of killing

    • Equality and ranking of status: how status is assigned or ranked among beings at different stages or conditions

    • Autonomy: definition and its relevance to moral status

    • Why autonomy matters for moral status and ethical reasoning

    • Mothers’ rights: considerations about reproductive rights and autonomy

    • Reciprocity as a necessary condition for moral status: whether reciprocal expectations or social roles contribute to moral status

    • Rights: Natural rights vs. Positive rights; their definitions and pros/cons

    • “In trust” rights or related notions: rights justified by trust or duties of others

    • Our papers: references to course readings and discussions (Marquis, Thomson, Tooley, etc.)

    • Marquis, Thomson, Tooley: their general views on abortion and moral status

    • AU and Kant on the moral community: quick reminder of important frameworks for page 2 content

  • Summary of core themes to study

    • The gap between legal status and moral status is central to abortion debates

    • Developmental stages and vagueness complicate moral judgments

    • Different ethical theories yield different prescriptions about abortion, especially on end/means and autonomy

    • Thought experiments and intuition pumps are tools to test principles, but must be used carefully

    • Autonomy, rights (natural vs positive), and morality of killing (active vs passive) are key axes in argumentation

    • Major theorists (Marquis, Thomson, Tooley) offer distinct perspectives that inform the broader debate

1. Marquis

  • Central idea: Wrongness of killing = depriving someone of a future like ours (FLO).

  • Strengths:

    • Avoids personhood/rights debates.

    • General principle (applies to humans, non-humans, infants).

    • Non-religious.

  • Implications:

    • Abortion usually wrong (fetus has valuable future).

    • Contraception OK (no determinate subject yet).

    • Euthanasia allowed if no valuable future.

    • Killing infants wrong (contrary to Tooley/Warren).

  • Criticisms:

    • Measuring value of future is tricky.

    • Ignores mother’s autonomy.

    • Potentiality debates (sperm/egg? cloning?).

2. Thomson

  • Strategy: Assume fetus = person with right to life → test through thought experiments.

  • Famous Analogies:

    • Violinist: RTL doesn’t equal right to use another’s body (rape pregnancies).

    • Violinist 2: Self-defense if mother’s life is endangered.

    • Coat: 3rd parties (doctors) may help the rightful owner (mother).

    • Fonda’s Hand: RTL = not to be unjustly killed, not to be kept alive by another’s body.

    • Chocolates: Distinguishes justice vs being nice → we should be Minimally Decent Samaritans, not Super Samaritans.

  • Implications:

    • Abortion sometimes permissible (rape, danger, lack of consent).

    • Laws forcing women to continue pregnancy = demand Supererogatory sacrifice.

  • Critics:

    • Utilitarians, Kantians, kinship-based objections.

    • Active killing vs letting die distinction.

3. Tooley

  • Central idea: Right to life requires being a person (self-conscious + awareness of oneself over time).

  • Distinction: Human ≠ Person.

    • Some humans (fetuses, newborns) are not persons.

    • Some non-humans could be persons.

  • Implications:

    • No right to life for zygote/fetus/infant.

    • Abortion (and even infanticide) morally permissible.

    • Animals might qualify.

  • Criticisms:

    • Too radical (allows infanticide).

    • Does potential personhood matter?

    • Requires sophisticated self-awareness test.

Condensed Contrast

  • Marquis: Abortion wrong because it robs a fetus of a valuable future like ours.

  • Thomson: Even if fetus is a person, it doesn’t always have a right to use the mother’s body. Abortion sometimes justified.

  • Tooley: Only self-conscious beings are persons with a right to life. Fetuses (and even infants) lack this → abortion always permissible.