Thomson's Variation
Recall Noonan's Argument:
|
Noonan's Argument: |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
If x is an act of harming a human being and x has no sufficient reason, then x is morally wrong. |
|
|
|
2 |
If x is an abortion then x is an act of harming a human conceptus (embryo, fetus). |
|
|
|
3 |
A human conceptus is a human being. |
|
|
Therefore |
4 |
If x is an abortion then x is an act of harming a human being. |
2&3 |
|
|
5 |
If x is an abortion then, if x is not a case of cancerous uterous or ectopic pregnancy, then x has no sufficient reason. |
|
|
Therefore |
6 |
If x is an abortion and x is not a case of cancerous uterous or ectopic pregnancy, then x is an act of harming a human being and x has no sufficient reason. |
4&5 |
|
Therefore |
7 |
If x is an abortion and x is not a case of cancerous uterous or ectopic pregnancy, then x is morally wrong. |
1&6 |
Consider Thomson's Variation:
|
Thomson's Variation: |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Step 1: |
1 |
Every fetus is a person. |
|
|
2 |
Every person has a right to life. |
||
|
Therefore |
3 |
Every fetus has a right to life. |
1&2 |
|
Step 2: |
4 |
A fetus' right to life is more stringent than a mother's right to determine what happens in and to her body. |
|
|
5 |
If a fetus' right to life is more stringent than a mother's right to determine what happens in and to her body, then no fetus may be killed. |
||
|
Therefore |
6 |
No fetus may be killed |
4&5 |
Compare the two:
|
1 |
Noonan's Argument is valid, as is Thomson's Variation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Both arguments take two steps. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Both arguments assume that the human conceptus is a human being. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
Premise (4) in Thomson's Variation is an analog of Premise (5) in Noonan's Argument. |
|
|
|
|
|