But that’s not applicable to the real-life situation of pregnancy. The people-seeds thought experiment obviously is intended to resemble a pregnancy that results from a consensual sexual encounter in which the partners used contraception.
Recall my description: People-seeds, like pollen, float about in the air.
They can be useful for shorthand, sure, so long as the anti-abortion camp doesn’t go so far as to believe that its opponents take life to be bad, and so long as the pro-abortion advocates don’t caricature their opponents as thinking it’s wrong to make choices.
Despite academia’s recent tendency to intensify (or incubate) the vulgarities of broader culture, and despite the self-satisfaction of its cloistered, professional thinkers, there is great value to exploring what the academic version of the abortion debate has been like.
In fact, for many people, doesn’t the entire issue hinge on whether we classify the life inside the womb as a person?
Persuasive Essay On Pro Choice Contract Assignments
In other words, if the life inside is indeed a human person, then the “pro-life” side wins; if the life inside is If there’s something philosophy revels in, it’s upending the assumptions thought to be rigidly fixed in a debate.
Thomson argues that abortion is permissible even if the fetus is a person. How, exactly, does she assume that the fetus is a person — the very thing opponents of abortion work so hard to establish?
She does so by building into her thought experiments the personhood of the relevant characters.
Thomson is basically raising the hurdle that a “pro-lifer” needs to clear.
Whereas before, all that the anti-abortion advocate had to do was show that the fetus is a person, now, in light of Thomson’s argument, even if the “pro-lifer” does this, that is no longer enough to secure a victory in the debate.