Judith Thomson And Don Marquis On Abortion Philosophy Essay

Judith Thomson And Don Marquis On Abortion Philosophy Essay In politics, religion and even ethics, abortion is a highly controversial topic. Judith Thomson and Don Marquis are no different, as both of these philosophers have their own opinions on abortion. Thomson presents a qualified argument in favor of abortion in some cases based on what we as humans are obligated to do to help others. Her argument survives the challenges that Marquiss opinion against abortion presents. The morality of abortion is discussed by both of these famous philosophers. Judith Thomson provides a defense for abortion, in specific circumstances, through a series of bizarre thought experiments (Thomson, 1971). Thomson begins her argument by refuting the common arguments against abortion, which sets up her first peculiar thought experiment (Thomson, 1971). In the experiment, she asks the subject to imagine that they wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist (Thomson, 1971, p. 48). This violinist has a fatal kidney disease and you are the only person that can save him (Thomson, 1971). You must stay in bed with this violinist for a specific amount of time and after that amount of time you will be free to leave (Thomson, 1971). Thomson implants the idea that the violinists right to life is more salient than your right to decide what happens to your own body. The basis for Thomsons argument becomes based on our duty to each other as humans. Thomson states that nowhere in this country, is any man compelled by law to be even a Minimally Decent Samaritan to any person whereas, in most states in this country women are compelled by law to be not merely Minimally Decent Samaritans but Good Samaritans to unborn persons inside them (Thomson, 1971, p. 63). A Good Samaritan is someone that is often heroic and goes out of their way to help people in heroic ways whereas being a minimally decent Samaritan just requires people to do the right thing without being heroic. This idea is the most persuasive she presents because it shows a clear inconsistency in the expectations of society. Thomson uses the brutal example of the death of Kitty Genovese to further establish her point (Thomson, 1971). In this case a woman named Kitty Genovese was attacked and stabbed to death. Although 38 people heard the encounter only one of them called the police while another yelled out the window to tell them to stop. A minimally decent Samaritan would have at least called the cops, showing that 37 of the people werent being minimally decent Samaritans in this case. However since there is no law against failing to be a minimally decent Samaritan, none of the 37 people were at fault. It is absurd that those people werent held up to the standard of being minimally decent but people against abortion hold that women must be good Samaritans to an unborn child inside of them. Another aspect of Thomsons argument is focused on a characteristic of abortion that she only touches upon. Throughout her argument for the permissibility of abortion she assumes that a fetus is a human at the moment of conception even though she doesnt agree with this idea as shown from this quotation from the beginning of essay, A newly fertilized ovum, a newly implanted clump of cells, is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree (Thomson, 1971, p. 48). There is obviously no direct parallel between an oak tree and humans, but this raises an interesting question regarding when we must say that a fetus becomes a human. Through this idea and by discussing the double standard surround our responsibility to help each other, Thomson provides a compelling argument. Philosopher Don Marquis wrote his piece Why Abortion Is Immoral after Judith Thomsons essay and developed an argument challenging Thomson. Marquis addresses a central aspect of the abortion argument by talking about when life starts during pregnancy (Marquis, 1989). For the sake of his argument, he concludes that life is present at the moment of conception (Marquis, 1989). The main focus of Marquis argument is the idea that since a fetus is considered a person, the fetus has a future-like-ours, where the fetus will have plenty of experiences and happiness just like any other human being (Marquis, 1989). Since it is prima facie seriously morally wrong to a kill a human being, then because adults and fetuses both share this future it is also prima facie seriously morally wrong to kill fetuses (Marquis, 1989). This poses a rather large problem for Thomsons argument. Her argument about our duty towards each other becomes irrelevant because if something is the only prima facie seriously m orally wrong act then, in the view of a pluralist, it is your duty not to do that action. Thomson points out that, at the time her essay was written, the law required women to be good Samaritans to fetuses (Thomson, 1971). However, the only morally relevant fact in this case becomes that you have a prima facie duty not to kill humans, including fetuses. Thomson states that there are no laws requiring people to be minimally decent Samaritans, but that there should be because many people hold women to this standard in the case of abortion (Thomson, 1971). However, if we begin holding people to minimally decent standards, then according to Marquis argument it seems that women must carry their children to term. Plenty of people carry their baby the full term so since Thomson is asking for laws requiring people to be minimally decent people, then by her own logic abortion would be illegal. While Don Marquis presents a strong argument challenging Judith Thomsons argument, Thomsons argument proves to be stronger than Marquis. When we consider the idea that the zygote might not be a fetus at the time of conception, Marquis argument begins to fall apart. This collapse begins when Thomson uses the oak tree analogy. She states, Similar things might be said about the development of an acorn into an oak tree, and it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that we had better say they are (Thomson, 1971, p. 47). This obviously cant be used as a direct parallel to a fetus, but it serves to prove her point. Thomson conveys a relevant idea to the argument of abortion that Marquis fails to discuss. Another way that Marquis argument fails is because he contradicts himself on the subject of contraception (Marquis, 1989). At the time of conception the life is just a cluster of various cells. One step removed from conception, is the failure of a sperm fertilizing an egg for variou s reasons including contraception. It then seems that the use of contraception would be prima facie wrong because it denies the sperm and the egg the possibility of fertilization, which would lead to a life of pleasurable experiences. Marquis is adamant that he doesnt think contraception is wrong (Marquis, 1989) but this becomes seems to contradict his own reasoning. Another problem in Marquis future-like-ours argument is that Marquis is relying on the fetuses having fortunate lives (Marquis, 1989). However the question should be raised about children born into tremendously difficult lives. While many fetuses will have fine childhoods, there are many horrible cases of children living in extremely impoverished conditions. Because this is an idea that Marquis should have considered his argument suffers yet another blow. Abortion is a topic with a multitude of views and opinions to discuss and both Thomson and Marquis many plenty of the possibilities. It is clear that, while Marquis has a rather intriguing argument, Thomson provides a much stronger argument for her view on abortion. Not only does she provide more valid or sensible evidence, her argument is also more applicable to real world situations. Rarely in everyday life are we forced to consider the future of a zygote but almost everyday we must consider how much we owe to one another. Both Judith Thomson and Don Marquis are enormously respected philosophers but in this situation Thomson manages to survive the opposition. All it took was a further examination of Marquis opinion, to discover the more stringent argument. Reference Page Marquis, D. (1989). Why abortion is immoral. In The Journal of Philosophy (4 ed., Vol. 86, pp. 183-202). Journal of Philosophy Inc. Thomson, J. (1971). A defense of abortion. In Philosophy Public Affairs (1 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 47-66). Princeton University Press. Thomson, J. (1971). A defense of abortion. In J. Thomson (Ed.), Philosophy Public Affairs (1 ed., Vol. 1, p. 48). Princeton University Press. Thomson, J. (1971). A defense of abortion. In J. Thomson (Ed.), Philosophy Public Affairs (1 ed., Vol. 1, p. 63). Princeton University Press.

A View from the Bridge Essay Essay

A View From The Bridge’ is a play that was first staged in 1955. It was written by Arthur Miller. Arthur Miller was born into a Jewish family in New York in 1915, whose grandparents had come to America from Poland. When the family business failed, they moved to Brooklyn, where A View from the Bridge is set. There, Miller worked in a warehouse to earn money for his university fees. He began to write plays when he was in university and continued to write them after he graduated and became a journalist. In the play, loyalty dictates the events very strongly as because of Eddies mixed emotions for Catharine he chooses to be more loyal to her than to all of his family. Miller shows the importance of loyalty through Eddie telling Catharine the ‘Vinnie Bolzano’ story. Catharine’s reaction shows the audience that in Italy, family loyalty is the most important thing as Catharine is both shocked and horrified that Vinnie snitched on his own Uncle this is why she shockingly says ‘The kid snitched? Miller uses this as an opportunity to tell the audience that the Italian American community is very loyal, which makes Eddie’s betrayal even more shocking. Because Vinnie snitched on his Uncle he could never show his face in public because every one despised and loathed him this is why Beatrice says ‘I never seen him again’. This also shows that the Italian American Community has a very ‘if you snitch on one of us, you snitch on all of us’ mentality. Another way that Arthur Miller portrays the importance of loyalty in the play is the references Eddie uses to Catharine’s Mother. this quote shows that Eddie tries to use the promise he made to Catharine’s Mother as an excuse for being so strict and this is why he says ‘I promised your Mother on her death bed’. This is why he doesn’t want her working in the dodgy part of town; where as it is because of the emotions he feels toward Catharine and he doesn’t want her to have another male figure in her life who could be more important than he is. One of the most important scenes in the play is the ‘Phone Call’ scene which shows Eddie changing his loyalties from his family and friends, to just Catharine. ‘Give me the number for the immigration bureau’ this shows Eddie doing what Vinnie Bolzano didand snitching on Marco and Rodolpho, he does this because of the mixed and confusing emotions he feels for Catharine. Miller also uses stage  directions in the scene such as ‘A phone booth begins to glow on the opposite side of the stage; a faint, lonely blue’ I think that Miller uses the Lighting on the phone booth to show the audience the conflict going on in Eddie’s head; to loose every thing (his family and friends friendship, love, trust and loyalty) but keep Catharine for himself When the immigration officers arrive at the house, Eddie looses the respect and loyalty from his family. Beatrice realizes what Eddie has done when she says‘My God, what did you do? ’. She is completely shocked and horrified as Eddie was a loyal and family orientated man. Miller uses this quote to show the audience that Beatrice is astounded and aghast that Eddie has chosen Catherine over her, even though she is his wife. Marco is furious with the fact that Eddie has just ruined any chance of him getting an American citizenship, this now means that Marco wouldn’t be able to get a well paid job and support his family back in Italy. This is why he says ‘That one! He killed my children! That one stole the food from my children’ this is because although Eddie hasn’t directly murdered Marco’s family, his actions will lead to Marco getting deported and he wouldn’t be able to give his family money to buy food and they would consequently die. The audience would be shocked by what he is saying as he is insulting Eddie who Miller has made out to be the confused character who although he is doing something terrible he thinks that he is doing it for the right reasons, and the audience would therefore feel sorry for him. Miller uses the loyalty theme to show the weakness of men, Eddie betrays his family and community because of the mixed emotions he feels for Catharine.

Tensions and Conflict on the Korean Peninsula

The Korean Peninsula is a region located in Eastern Asia extending south from the Asian continent for about 683 miles (1,100 km). Today, it is politically divided into North Korea and South Korea. North Korea is located on the northern part of the peninsula, and it extends from China south to the 38th parallel of latitude. South Korea then extends from that area and encompasses the rest of the Korean Peninsula. The Korean Peninsula was in the news for much of 2010, and especially toward the end of the year, because of growing conflicts between the two nations. Conflict on the Korean Peninsula is not new however as North and South Korea have long had tensions with one another that dates back before the Korean War, which ended in 1953. History of the Korean Peninsula Historically, the Korean Peninsula was occupied by only Korea, and it was ruled by several different dynasties, as well as the Japanese and the Chinese. From 1910 to 1945 for example, Korea was controlled by the Japanese, and it was mostly controlled from Tokyo as a part of the Empire of Japan. Toward the end of World War II, the Soviet Union (USSR) declared war on Japan, and by August 10, 1945, it occupied the northern part of the Korean Peninsula. At the end of the war, Korea was then divided into northern and southern portions at the 38th parallel by the Allies at the Potsdam Conference. The United States was to administer the southern part, while the USSR administered the northern area.This division started the conflicts between the two areas of Korea because the northern region followed the USSR and became communist, while the south opposed this form of government and formed a strong anti-communist, capitalist government. As a result, in July of 1948, the anti-communist southern region drafted a constitution and began to hold national elections which were subjected to terrorism. However, on August 15, 1948, the Republic of Korea (South Korea) was officially founded, and Syngman Rhee was elected as president. Shortly after that, the USSR established a Communist North Ko rean Government called the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea) with Kim Il-Sung as its leader. Once the two Koreas were formally established, Rhee and Il-Sung worked to reunify Korea. This caused conflicts though because each wanted to unify the area under their own political system and rival governments were established. Also, North Korea was heavily supported by the USSR and China and fighting along the border of North and South Korea was not uncommon. The Korean War By 1950, the conflicts on the border of North and South Korea led to the beginning of the Korean War. On June 25, 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea and almost immediately the United Nations member states began to send aid to South Korea. North Korea was, however, able to quickly advance south by September 1950. By October though, U.N. forces were able to move the fighting north again and on October 19, North Koreas capital, Pyongyang was taken. In November, Chinese forces joined North Korean forces and the fighting was then moved back south and in January 1951, South Koreas capital, Seoul was taken. In the months that followed, heavy fighting ensued, but the center of the conflict was near the 38th parallel. Although peace negotiations began in July of 1951, fighting continued throughout 1951 and 1952. On July 27, 1953, peace negotiations ended, and the Demilitarized Zone was formed. Shortly after that, an Armistice Agreement was signed by the Korean Peoples Army, the Chinese Peoples Volunteers and the United Nations Command, which was led by the U.S. South Korea however, never signed the agreement, and to this day an official peace treaty has never been signed between North and South Korea.   Todays Tensions Since the end of the Korean War, tensions between North and South Korea have remained. For example according to CNN, in 1968, North Korea unsuccessfully attempted to assassinate South Koreas president. In 1983, a bombing in Myanmar that was linked to North Korea  killed 17 South Korean officials, and in 1987, North Korea was accused of bombing a South Korean airplane. Fighting has also repeatedly occurred both land and sea borders because each nation is continually trying to unify the peninsula with its own system of government.In 2010, tensions between North and South Korea were especially high after a South Korean warship was sunk on March 26. South Korea claims that North Korea sunk the Cheonan in the Yellow Sea off the South Korean island of Baengnyeong. North Korea denied responsibility for the attack and tensions between the two nations have been high ever since. Most recently on November 23, 2010, North Korea launched an artillery attack on the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong. North Korea claims that South Korea was conducting war maneuvers, but South Korea states that it was conducting maritime military drills. Yeonpyeong was also attacked in January 2009. It is located near a maritime border between the countries that North Korea wants moved south. Since the attacks, South Korea began practicing military drills in early December.To learn more about the historic conflict on the Korean Peninsula and the Korean War, visit this  page on the Korean War as well as North Korea and South Korea Facts from this site. Sources CNN Wire Staff. (23 November 2010). Korean Tension: A Look at the Conflict - CNN.com. Infoplease.com. (n.d.). Korean War - Infoplease.com. United States Department of State. (10 December 2010). South Korea.

Pan Africanism For Beginners Essay - 1481 Words

Sid Lemelle hoped for his book, Pan-Africanism for Beginners, to be a comprehensive guide to the complex concept of Pan-Africanism. Lemelle begins the book by broadly defining Pan-Africanism to mean the inclusion of â€Å"all people of African ancestry living in continental Africa and throughout the world.† This definition sets the foundation for his analysis of Pan-Africanism. Pan-Africanism for Beginners explores the major leaders and events associated with Pan-African sentiments chronologically. The exploration begins with the â€Å"early pioneers of Pan-Africanism† (20) such as Prince Hall, Paul Cuffe, Dr. Martin R. Delany, and Fredrick Douglass. While this was an early stage of Pan-Africanism, conflicting views on how to deal the issues of racism and oppression. Prince Hall and Paul Cuffe believed in the emigration of blacks to Africa. However, Dr. Delany and Frederick Douglass â€Å"argued against emigration.† Instead, they believed that the â€Å"United S tates was their home, and that they should remain† (25). Lemelle notes that Dr. Delany later changed his attributes, however it is unclear if he changes his views from support of emigration to opposition to emigration or vice versa. This is not a major weakness; however, it did confuse me as a reader attempting to understand the beginnings of Pan-Africanism. One of the initial major Pan-African events Lemelle introduced was the creation of Sierra Leone’s â€Å"Province of Freedom† along with the founding of Liberia. These two â€Å"ex-slaveShow MoreRelatedThe Pan Africanism For Beginners1829 Words   |  8 PagesThe Pan-African movement as described in Lemelle’s Pan-Africanism for Beginners is a set of ideas and ideologies containing social and cultural, political and economic, material and spiritual aspects. Each aspect is accompanied by a plethora of historical figures and terms unique to the movement, well described throughout the text and in the pres ented glossary. This book makes it easy to understand all the information accompanying each topic. While it does have its strengths and weaknesses, thisRead MoreThe Pan Africanism For Beginners1823 Words   |  8 Pages The Pan-African movement as described in Lemelle’s Pan-Africanism for Beginners is a set of ideas and ideologies containing social and cultural, political and economic, material and spiritual aspects. Each aspect is accompanied by a plethora of historical figures and terms unique to the movement described thoroughly in the text and the presented glossary. The piece makes it easy to understand all the information accompanying each topic. While it does have its strengths and weaknesses, the book