Abby Dorman
Dr. Gordon
Phil. 101
April 24. 2015
Argument Explanation/Evaluation #3
point is to oppose people who think that abortion is wrong in all cases,
and her essay goes on to describe why there are times when it is
acceptable. Her first argument is against people who only focus on the
status of the fetus as a human and then jump immediately from there
the sake of her own argument, she assumes throughout the essay that
that the violinist needs to use your kidneys for nine months to stay
alive, and to unplug from him would mean that he would die. Thomas
compares the choice that this person has to make about whether or
not to unplug from the violinst to the choice that a woman would make
about whether or not to get an abortion in the case of rape. This brings
Dorman 2
conflicts in the paper is over which is more important: the fetus right
to life or the womans responsibility to allow the child to use her body
to live.
womans life is in danger if she carries the baby to term. She says that
those hold to the extreme view believe that a woman cannot get an
abortion even in this case. They say that abortion is considered killing
claim by saying that the mother does not have sit by and passively
wait for her death. She uses the violinist analogy, saying, If anything
in the world is true, it is that you do not commit murder, you do not do
yourself from the violinist to save your life. (p. 385) She also uses a
tiny house analogy to describe this situation. In this case, you are
trapped inside a tiny house with a growing child who would eventually
crush you to death and destroy the house. She says you have the right
abortion, Thomson writes, In sum, a woman surely can defend her life
For the rest of her essay, Thomson talks about abortion in more
On page 387 she says, Isnt the childs right to life weightier than
anything over than the mothers own right to life, which she might put
has a responsibility to let the baby grow in her body. She doesnt come
fetus, as a human, has a right to. If the fetus has a right to life, she
argues that this consists not in the right not to be killed, but rather in
the right not to be killed unjustly. (p. 388) Her conclusion is that
an unborn baby to use her body to sustain its life, the baby does not
own her body and therefore the mother is not unjust in getting an
abortion. She also says that there are cases when abortion is
mother does not have the right to secure the death of the unborn child.
main points I disagree with is that a baby does not have the right to
use its mothers body. She says that it is just to let someone use your
body in their hour of need, but they do not have a right that obligates
you to let them use it. While this may be true in the case of her
Dorman 4
analogies with the violinist and Henry Fonda, I dont think it equates to
For the same reason, I think her violinist analogy had several
perceivable faults. She sets the amount of time that the person would
of time (nine months) is set in stone. The mother knows exactly how
much time it will take to grow the baby, and she can give it up for
adoption if she doesnt want to commit to any longer than that. Also,
as soon as the time was up and you would never have any obligation
adoption. I think that some of her analogies like this lacked strength
burglar entering someones house after they had left the window open.
Thomson argues that it is absurd for someone to say that the burglar
has a right to be in the house just because the window was open, and
mothers body just because she had sex. I think that the mother does
the situation.
pregnancy. I think that in cases of rape and life-ending harm for the
mother, the issue becomes much more complicated. The decision has
to be made case by case and in the end can only come down to the