The Good Life Thomson Analysis

PHIL 125: The Good life
Tony Elliott
Argumentative Paper
Word Count: 1519

Section 1 Introduction
In Section 2, I will present Thomson’s argument that abortion is impermissible. In Section 3, I will raise an objection to that argument. In Section 4, I will explain how Thomson could respond to my objection of their theory. In Section 5, I will examine two ways my objection could be defended from this response.
Section 1 Thomson’s Argument
Abortion has become of the most controversial things in history. To say its permissible or impermissible will lead to a discussion or argument where someone will disagree with your opinion. Thomson argues that abortion is not impermissible. She argues that abortion is in some cases permissible. Many individuals

A crucial premise in that argument is that the right to life must be held to a higher degree of importance than any other right. Thomson believes that premise to be false and uses the first of several examples of which she makes use throughout the paper to persuade her readers. These examples are designed to show that there are situations where it is permissible to take an action in order to reason with a person’s own rights even though doing so violates an innocent person right to life. A person must always consider another person’s life before they make a life changing decision. Every person has the right to life. It is possible that a person would have thought that having the right to life means that one has the right to do whatever it takes to sustain their life. Thomson thinks that this must be a mistake, the example of the violinist case shows this. Similarly, a person might think that having the right to life means that one has the right not to be killed. But, Thomson again thinks that the violinist case shows this to be false. Someone could easily unplug themselves from the violinist even though it will kill the person. But, does the person have the right to save their own life at the result. It is comparable to abortion as people feel as if they are saving themselves from having the child by getting an

Thomson could argue against my theory of the wrongness of abortion in all cases. She could argue with the following. Abortion is only wrong if the fetus is deemed a person, and there is no way to determine if the fetus is or is not a person than it comes down to opinion. That being said, the mother does not have the right to end her child’s (fetuses) life. Even though a person has the potential to change the world it doesn’t mean someone else won’t.
When an abortion takes place, it destroys a fetus’s potential. But, that doesn’t mean that another child does not have the same potential. Also, when the mother is at risk if the child is born, is it right to choose the mother over the child. What if the child had more potential to do good than the mother, is it still moral to pick the mother? If a woman is raped and she becomes pregnant she should be able to abort the fetus as it was not desired and was forced to bare the fetus. The woman shouldn’t be held responsibility for something that was out of her control and was forced upon