Analysis Of Noonan's Argument From Probabilities

1246 Words 5 Pages
1. What is Noonan 's "Argument from Probabilities?" How does this argument work, and what does he think it implies about the morality or immorality of abortion?
The argument from probabilities is not aimed at establishing an objective discontinuity which may be taken into account in moral disclosure. Life itself is a matter of probabilities, as most moral reasoning is an estimate of probabilities. It seems in accord with the structure of reality and the nature of moral thought to found a moral judgement on the change in probabilities at conception. The rejection of the attempted distinction based on viability and visibility, experience and feeling, may be buttressed by the following considerations: moral judgements often rest on distinctions,
…show more content…
The newly fertilized ovum is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree. Suppose we assume, just for the sake of argument, that the fetus is a person with the right to life from the moment of conception. It does not follow; she argues that abortion is never justified. She appeals to a series of imaginary cases, such as being kidnapped and plugged into a famous violinist, being trapped in a tiny house with a growing child, and having people seeds growing in your carpet. Reflection on these cases shows that the right to life is only the right not to be killed unjustly; it does not entail the right to use your body or to live in your house. These cases are supposed to be analogous to cases of rape, threat to life, or when a woman has taken reasonable precautions not to get pregnant. Thomson does not, however she concludes that abortion is justified in any and every case. There is a moral requirement to be a Minimally Decent Samaritan as Thomson puts it, and this makes a late abortion wrong if it is done just for the sake of convenience. To use her example, it would be wrong for a woman in her seventh month of pregnancy to get an abortion just to avoid the nuisance of postponing a trip …show more content…
She claims that the fetus has none of these characteristics of a person in the early stages of development, and thus it is not a person with moral rights in those stages. She suggested that fetus would to meet certain criteria’s. Sentience is defined as persons who have capacity for conscious experience, including experience of pain and pleasure. Emotionality deals with feelings. Reason is a person being able to solve problems using their minds. Communicate is being able to communicate ideas to another individual. Self-awareness is a person being able to understand themselves as distinct from other individuals. With moral agency, people can regulate their behavior according to their ideas and principles. According to Warren, these criteria’s would determine if the fetus has moral status as humans. I also believe that pregnant women would to be monitored to confirm those criteria’s. Warren believes that the first couple weeks of pregnancy a fetus does not have a functional nervous system and it isn’t capable to have the same experience as humans. Warren also describes the fetus isn’t aware of itself and can’t control itself in any type of way. She believes early fetuses are not humans. She believes that abortion is morally

Related Documents