Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 35 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 348

Thread: "The Famous Violinist" and the ethics of abortion

  1. #1

    Default "The Famous Violinist" and the ethics of abortion

    Given that there are so many abortion-related threads going on at the moment, and given my inclination not to engage in discussion on the Halappanavar case until all the facts are in, I thought it might be interesting to devote a thread to a more abstract discussion of the ethics of abortion, with a particular focus on The Famous Violinist thought experiment. Some background:


    The philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson came up with this one in 1971 ("A Defense of Abortion"). (A Defense of Abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )


    Here's the quick Wiki-summary:

    The "famous violinist" thought experiment asks a person to consider the ethics of a scenario where they wake to find themselves in a hospital serving as life support to a famous violinist. The person is asked to consider that they were not consulted prior to this arrangement, but that if they detach from the violinist he will die. Thomson wrote, "If you stay in the hospital bed, connected to the violinist, he will be totally cured in nine months. You are unlikely to suffer harm. No one else can save him. Do you have an obligation to stay connected?" ( Violinist (thought experiment) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )
    Here's the full text of "A Defense of Abortion": Judith Jarvis Thomson: A Defense of Abortion

    The Wikipedia page on A Defense of Abortion in particular is a good place to start in terms of objections and responses to the paper.



    (Note that what makes this sort of argument especially interesting is that it works even if you assume that the foetus is a person with the full range of rights we would normally think people ought to have)

    NB: Please try to stay on topic, which in this case is the merits or flaws of the above thought experiment or ethical arguments surrounding abortion more generally. There are loads of threads already dedicated to various aspects of the Halappanavar case itself.


    So, is Thomson's argument convincing and if not, why not?
    Last edited by Mercurial; 17th November 2012 at 02:17 AM.
    Repeal the 27th.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member darkhorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    In the hills with the daughters of Lenin
    Posts
    18,210
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Do we have to have a thread on every 'famous persons' view on abortion?
    Or are sites like this about giving everyone a say...
    An opinion is an opinion - regardless of how rich or famous the holder is

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member Mountaintop's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Caught between the moon and New York City
    Posts
    1,256
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    If it's Nigel Kennedy.....I'm already in the pub explaining why I'm in a nightie with tubes hanging out of my arm...

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    442
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse View Post
    Do we have to have a thread on every 'famous persons' view on abortion?
    Or are sites like this about giving everyone a say...
    An opinion is an opinion - regardless of how rich or famous the holder is
    Idiotic thread. It takes one argument for abortion and complicates it by attaching some jargon to it.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darkhorse View Post
    Do we have to have a thread on every 'famous persons' view on abortion?
    Or are sites like this about giving everyone a say...
    An opinion is an opinion - regardless of how rich or famous the holder is
    It's worth discussing because it's extremely influential, at least where the ethics of abortion are concerned.

    Indeed, articulating this view is more or less what made Thomson famous in the first place (insofar as any modern philosopher is famous).
    Repeal the 27th.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member Al Gebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    6,061
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountaintop View Post
    If it's Nigel Kennedy.....I'm already in the pub explaining why I'm in a nightie with tubes hanging out of my arm...


    If I could give you a thousand likes I would.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    753
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I live next door to a man who practices the violin regularly, I would gladly pull the plug on him.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    442
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    It's worth discussing because it's extremely influential, at least where the ethics of abortion are concerned.

    Indeed, articulating this view is more or less what made Thomson famous in the first place (insofar as any modern philosopher is famous).
    She became famous for stating the obvious because of a condescending attitude to a mediocre woman.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by titmouse View Post
    Idiotic thread. It takes one argument for abortion and complicates it by attaching some jargon to it.
    The point of the thought experiment is to simplify, rather than complicate. I certainly can see no jargon in the quote in the OP.
    Repeal the 27th.

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member Hewson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    On the horizon
    Posts
    8,329
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mercurial View Post
    Given that there are so many abortion-related threads going on at the moment, and given my inclination not to engage in discussion on the Halappanavar case until all the facts are in, I thought it might be interesting to devote a thread to a more abstract discussion of the ethics of abortion, with a particular focus on The Famous Violinist thought experiment. Some background:


    The philosopher Judith Jarvis Thomson came up with this one in 1971 ("A Defense of Abortion"). (A Defense of Abortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )


    Here's the quick Wiki-summary:



    Here's the full text of "A Defense of Abortion": Judith Jarvis Thomson: A Defense of Abortion

    The Wikipedia page on A Defense of Abortion in particular is a good place to start in terms of objections and responses to the paper.



    (Note that what makes this sort of argument especially interesting is that it works even if you assume that the foetus is a person with the full range of rights we would normally think people ought to have)

    NB: Please try to stay on topic, which in this case is the merits or flaws of the above thought experiment or ethical arguments surrounding abortion more generally. There are loads of threads already dedicated to various aspects of the Halappanavar case itself.
    Stringjack already tried this stunt before.

    You posting it hasn't improved its effectiveness, I'm afraid.
    Abortion is an act of violence. Violence demeans humanity, particularly violence against women and children.

Page 1 of 35 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •