It allows for a supports our sense that, for example, a sick and desperately frightened fourteen-year-old schoolgirl, pregnant due to rape, may of course choose abortion, and that any law which rules this out is an insane law.
Admittedly she did nothing at all which would give the unborn person a right to the use of her body. But this seems to me to be a mistake, and perhaps the simplest way to show this is to bring out that while we must certainly grant that innocent persons have a right to life, the theses in 1 through 4 are all false.
If so, then her aborting it would be more like the boys taking away the chocolates, and less like your unplugging yourself from the violinist--doing so would be depriving it of what it does have a right to, and thus would be doing it an injustice. But if the gas is released, and he does have a few extra months added as a result, it will then become possible for you to bring him out of his coma by giving him the use of your body for 9 months.
I think that extending the length of pregnancy in this example is utterly unhelpful. Surely we do not have any such "special responsibility" for a person unless we have assumed it, explicitly or implicitly. When thought experiment-like things happen in real life, people just grope in the dark.
But the effect of saying, this is to obscure what we should keep distinct, namely the difference between the boy's refusal in this case and the boy's refusal in the earlier case, in which the box was given to both boys jointly, and in which the small brother thus had what was from any point of view clear title to half.
You wake up in the morning and find your womb having been impregnated with a foetus. Not content with that"Sing Song Kitty", which I only knew from Doc Watson's version, turns up with different words - nonsense and otherwise- as "Daddy's Song", and sounds just great. I suppose we may take it as a datum that in a case of pregnancy due to rape the mother has not given the unborn person a right to the use of her body for food and shelter.
But does he have a right against everybody that they shall refrain from unplugging you frolic him. So, including this irrelevant distraction seems to me, at best to complicate things to no purpose, and at worst, to stack the deck in favor of the view that it is OK to unplug.
A very early abortion is surely not the killing of a person, and so is not dealt with by anything I have said here. Surely not--despite the fact that you voluntarily opened your windows, you knowingly kept carpets and upholstered furniture, and you knew that screens were sometimes defective.
Thomson shows why this standard argument against abortion is a somewhat inadequate account of the morality of abortion. There is room for much discussion and argument as to precisely which, if any.
Similar things might be said about the development of an acorn into an oak trees, and it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that we had better say they are.
These two features of the child her existence and neediness cannot be separated because both stem from the same act, sex. The curious thing is that even though you know that with a recorded artefact you'll get to hear exactly the same performance on each and every replay, you really do feel that June's responding to the song texts afresh each time rather than just wheeling out a predetermined response with exactly the same inflections and emphases.
I am inclined to agree, however, that the prospects for "drawing a line" in the development of the fetus look dim. Elsewhere, he gives us his take on "Red River Valley", beautifully played and with an added verse of his own in the middle; the famous tune is abandoned for a sparse dreamy sequence at that point in a songwriting experiment that reminds me of stuff Don Maclean was doing at the time, all of which makes it about as "folk" as you can get in an American context.
What is the alternative to biological connectedness. Thirty years on when we've embraced the darker moods of alt. As things now stand, the violinist has no more unconscious life ahead of him.
Suppose that box of chocolates I mentioned earlier had not been given to both boys jointly, but was given only to the older boy. If I was one of them, I would say that unplugging one violinist would be acceptable, but unplugging a million violinists every year is a completely different story: I said it would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide me with it, but that I had no right against him that he should do so.
Interestingly, the set also includes, at the perfectly reasonable insistence of compiler David Suff, one purely instrumental track Hug Pine emphasising the importance to June of her current accompanists Mark and Huw.
By the tenth week, for example, it already has a face, arms and less, fingers and toes; it has internal organs, and brain activity is detectable. Judith Jarvis Thomson on the Morality of Abortion Main Issue: If we grant that a fetus has a right to life, does that make voluntary abortion immoral?
Thomson's strategy is to get us to think about cases that do not involve abortion, in order to force us to articulate our basic moral assumptions. Judith Thomson's Defense of Abortion. STUDY. PLAY. day and discover you have been kidnapped by the Society for Music Lovers and attached to the kidney of a famous ailing violinist.
(and no more) morally relevant features of the ethical issue in question (abortion). Unrealistic thought experiment. Defusing the Violinist Analogy Mathew Lu Judith Jarvis Thomson's ''A Defense of Abortion" () 1 is surely the most influential philosophical article ever published on abortion.
Judith Jarvis Thomson: "A Defense of Abortion" I. Thomson's Project. Thomson grants for the sake of argument the premise that a human embryo is a person.; She challenges the idea that one can argue effectively from this premise to the conclusion that all abortion is morally impermissible.
"A Defense of Abortion" is a moral philosophy paper by Judith Jarvis Thomson first published in Granting for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, Thomson uses thought experiments to argue that the fetus's right to life does not trump the pregnant woman's right to control her own body and its life-support functions, and that induced abortion is therefore not morally.
Judith Jarvis Thomson's defence on abortion Most arguments concerning the abortion issue hinge on the moral status or standing of the fetus with respect to the rights it possesses and the obligations that are directly owed to it.
These arguments typically fall into two .A review of the issue of abortion in judith thompsons violinist