Exam 44: Don Marquis

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -According to Marquis, opponents of abortion typically provide __________ as their criterion for having a right to life.

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -According to Marquis, what is the standard argument against abortion? What objections does he raise to this argument? Do you think they are good ones? Why or why not?

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis claims that it would be morally arbitrary to refuse to acknowledge that animal suffering is wrong.

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -According to Marquis, the misfortune of death is explained by:

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis argues that killing is wrong primarily because:

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis argues that it would be wrong to refuse life-saving medical treatment.

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis claims that what makes the goods of my future good for me is not my desire for those goods now, because:

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -What does Marquis claim is the standard argument for the permissibility of abortion? What problems does Marquis raise for this argument? Do you think these problems can be overcome?

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis claims that something can be in one's interest even if one does not take an interest in that thing.

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -According to Marquis, contraception:

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis claims that Thomson's argument succeeds in showing the:

Don Marquis: An Argument That Abortion Is Wrong Marquis begins by arguing that the abortion debate has reached a standoff, and that the standard arguments on both sides have insurmountable problems. Opponents of abortion usually argue that all human beings have a right to life and the fetus is a human being, so the fetus has a right to life. Marquis objects that cancer-cell cultures are biologically human, but do not have a right to life. On the other hand, those who believe abortion is morally permissible often claim that only persons have a right to life and the fetus is not a person, so the fetus does not have a right to life. Marquis objects to this argument as well, on the grounds that infants and the severely retarded do not seem to be persons in the relevant sense, but clearly have a right to life. This suggests that a different approach to the abortion debate is needed. Marquis proceeds by asking what it is that makes killing normal adult human beings wrong. Killing is wrong, Marquis maintains, because it deprives the victim of a valuable future. That is, killing someone is wrong if it deprives her of a "future like ours" (FLO). This account is supported by four considerations: It fits with our considered judgment about the nature of the misfortune of death, it explains why murder is the worst of crimes, it coheres with our judgments about cases, and it is analogous to a persuasive argument for the wrongness of animal cruelty. If one accepts the FLO account of the wrongness of killing, one must conclude that abortion is presumptively wrong, because (in most cases) abortion deprives the fetus of a future like ours. Marquis closes by replying to the objection that his view entails that contraception is immoral. -Marquis claims that abortion is always impermissible.