Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba310y [2016/09/21 17:33] – some relationship endy stuff balleyneutsfl:classroom:seminars:pba310y [2023/06/12 09:04] (current) – mmccann
Line 1: Line 1:
-====== PBA310Y: The Good Samaritan Argument ======+====== PBA310Y: The Good Samaritan Argument (The Violinist) ======
 Prerequisite: [[PBA210H]] Prerequisite: [[PBA210H]]
 +
 +FIXME clip from movie Up for Killing Versus Letting Die
 +FIXME story of gas station, kid getting into wrong car and guy driving away, for Guarding argument thing
  
 ===== Judith Jarvis Thompson ===== ===== Judith Jarvis Thompson =====
 +  * Cool animation presenting the analogy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Br59pD583Io
   * [[http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm|A Defense of Abortion]]   * [[http://spot.colorado.edu/~heathwoo/Phil160,Fall02/thomson.htm|A Defense of Abortion]]
   * [[wp>A Defense of Abortion]]   * [[wp>A Defense of Abortion]]
-  * [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkLzpLjizrc|Do the Unborn Unjustly Use Another's Body?]]+  * http://www.str.org/articles/unstringing-the-violinist
   * "In chapter 7 of Francis Beckwith’s book, Politically Correct Death: Answering Arguments for Abortion Rights (1993), it extensively covers arguments such as this when refuting an analogy similar to the professor’s. The points Beckwith makes are in response to an analogy proposed by abortion advocate Judith Jarvis Thomson, known as "unplugging the violinist" and articulated in her paper, "A Defense of Abortion." http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/training/classroom/use#footnoteref3_bfcjhip   * "In chapter 7 of Francis Beckwith’s book, Politically Correct Death: Answering Arguments for Abortion Rights (1993), it extensively covers arguments such as this when refuting an analogy similar to the professor’s. The points Beckwith makes are in response to an analogy proposed by abortion advocate Judith Jarvis Thomson, known as "unplugging the violinist" and articulated in her paper, "A Defense of Abortion." http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/training/classroom/use#footnoteref3_bfcjhip
   * http://www.equipresources.org/atf/cf/%7B9C4EE03A-F988-4091-84BD-F8E70A3B0215%7D/JAA025.pdf   * http://www.equipresources.org/atf/cf/%7B9C4EE03A-F988-4091-84BD-F8E70A3B0215%7D/JAA025.pdf
 +
 +{{youtube>WkLzpLjizrc}}
 +
 ==== Analysis ==== ==== Analysis ====
 === Themes === === Themes ===
Line 29: Line 36:
   * "Perhaps a pregnant woman is vaguely felt to have the status of house, to which we don't allow the right of self-defense."   * "Perhaps a pregnant woman is vaguely felt to have the status of house, to which we don't allow the right of self-defense."
   * Indeed, in what pregnancy could it be supposed that the mother has given the unborn person such a right? It is not as if there are unborn persons drifting about the world, to whom a woman who wants a child says I invite you in."   * Indeed, in what pregnancy could it be supposed that the mother has given the unborn person such a right? It is not as if there are unborn persons drifting about the world, to whom a woman who wants a child says I invite you in."
 +  * Counter-example: aborting a baby who was purposefully conceived via IVF and then implanted. If that doesn't constitute "consent to pregnancy", I'm not sure what would 
 +
 +
   * "a burglar"   * "a burglar"
   * "If a set of parents do not try to prevent pregnancy, do not obtain an abortion, but rather take it home with them, then they have assumed responsibility for it, they have given it rights, and they cannot now withdraw support from it at the cost of its life because they now find it difficult to go on providing for it."   * "If a set of parents do not try to prevent pregnancy, do not obtain an abortion, but rather take it home with them, then they have assumed responsibility for it, they have given it rights, and they cannot now withdraw support from it at the cost of its life because they now find it difficult to go on providing for it."
Line 146: Line 156:
  
 Boonin finds it hard to come up with another suitable analogy for //creating// life, but instead turns to analogies for //extending// life to test the existence claim Boonin finds it hard to come up with another suitable analogy for //creating// life, but instead turns to analogies for //extending// life to test the existence claim
-> Imperfect Drug((There's also a second, but I don't think the second is necessary to understand the point; and a third, but Boonin just has this bizarre begging the question line of argument where we conveniently drops the presumption that a pre-born child is a person with a right to life in order to suggest that it's begging the question to say it's worse to have been created and then aborted than not to have been created at all)): You are the violinist's doctor. Seven years ago, you discovered that the violinist ahd contracted a rare disease that was on the verge of killing him. The only way to save his life that was available to you was to give him a drug that cures the disease but has one unfortunate side effect: Five to ten years after ingestion, it often causes the kidney ailment described in Thomson's story. Knowing that you alone would have the appropriate blood type to save the violinist were his kidneys to fail, you prescribed the drug and cured the disease. The violinist has now been struck by the kidney ailment. If you do not allow him the use of your kidneys for nine months, he will die.((Boonin, 172-173)+> Imperfect Drug((There's also a second, but I don't think the second is necessary to understand the point; and a third, but Boonin just has this bizarre begging the question line of argument where we conveniently drops the presumption that a pre-born child is a person with a right to life in order to suggest that it's begging the question to say it's worse to have been created and then aborted than not to have been created at all)): You are the violinist's doctor. Seven years ago, you discovered that the violinist ahd contracted a rare disease that was on the verge of killing him. The only way to save his life that was available to you was to give him a drug that cures the disease but has one unfortunate side effect: Five to ten years after ingestion, it often causes the kidney ailment described in Thomson's story. Knowing that you alone would have the appropriate blood type to save the violinist were his kidneys to fail, you prescribed the drug and cured the disease. The violinist has now been struck by the kidney ailment. If you do not allow him the use of your kidneys for nine months, he will die.((Boonin, 172-173)) 
   * Boonin wants to say that here you are responsible for the violinists [continued] existence, but not responsible for his needniess. And that this case //is// analogous to pregnancy: "Pregnancies that arise from voluntary intercourse are relevantly similar to [the] Imperfect Drug... A woman whose pregnancy is the result of voluntary intercourse, that is, is responsible for the existence of the fetus, but is not responsible for the neediness of the fetus, given that it exists."((Boonin, 174-175))   * Boonin wants to say that here you are responsible for the violinists [continued] existence, but not responsible for his needniess. And that this case //is// analogous to pregnancy: "Pregnancies that arise from voluntary intercourse are relevantly similar to [the] Imperfect Drug... A woman whose pregnancy is the result of voluntary intercourse, that is, is responsible for the existence of the fetus, but is not responsible for the neediness of the fetus, given that it exists."((Boonin, 174-175))
   * Blaise: It just seems so obviously untrue that it's analogous. What's the cause of the violinist's neediness in the imperfect drug scenario? His illness. What's the cause of a fetus's needinesss? Her existence, her age. In the imperfect drug case, you are not the cause of the violinist's neediness -- rather it's an evil side-effect of a life-extending treatment. In the case of mammalian reproduction though, of consensual human sex, a child's is needy //because// they exist, because every human being is needy in that way when they first come into existence. The imperfect drug analogy is almost as far off from pregnancy as Thomson's scenario -- Boonin's progress is so minimal, I'm actually really disappointed...   * Blaise: It just seems so obviously untrue that it's analogous. What's the cause of the violinist's neediness in the imperfect drug scenario? His illness. What's the cause of a fetus's needinesss? Her existence, her age. In the imperfect drug case, you are not the cause of the violinist's neediness -- rather it's an evil side-effect of a life-extending treatment. In the case of mammalian reproduction though, of consensual human sex, a child's is needy //because// they exist, because every human being is needy in that way when they first come into existence. The imperfect drug analogy is almost as far off from pregnancy as Thomson's scenario -- Boonin's progress is so minimal, I'm actually really disappointed...
Line 164: Line 175:
  
 Based on this scenario (//this// scenario?!), he concludes that if the good samaritan argument succeeds for rape cases that it also succeeds for nonrape cases. The rest of the chapter is devoted to arguing that it succeeds for rape cases. Based on this scenario (//this// scenario?!), he concludes that if the good samaritan argument succeeds for rape cases that it also succeeds for nonrape cases. The rest of the chapter is devoted to arguing that it succeeds for rape cases.
 +
 +FIXME Boonin vs. Trent Horn debate -- watch later https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3Grc1d2gew
 +
  
 ===== Objections on the Way in Which the Relationship Ends ==== ===== Objections on the Way in Which the Relationship Ends ====
Line 177: Line 191:
   * "Thomson's response to the killing versus letting die objection leaves her position vulnerable to those who think that there are sound independent reasons to place great moral weight on the distinction between killing and letting die."((Boonin, 190))   * "Thomson's response to the killing versus letting die objection leaves her position vulnerable to those who think that there are sound independent reasons to place great moral weight on the distinction between killing and letting die."((Boonin, 190))
     * Boonin sets up two rescue track scenarios to paint the distinction in a favourable light. "You can fail to save one innocent person in order to save five others, they will say, but you cannot kill one innocent person in order to save five others."((Boonin, 192))     * Boonin sets up two rescue track scenarios to paint the distinction in a favourable light. "You can fail to save one innocent person in order to save five others, they will say, but you cannot kill one innocent person in order to save five others."((Boonin, 192))
-  * __Hysterotomy//Hysterectomy:__ You could just remove the fetus and allow it to die. At most, abortion critics can establish that some methods of abortion are morally impermissible.((Boonin, 193-194))+  * __Hysterotomy/Hysterectomy:__ You could just remove the fetus and allow it to die. At most, abortion critics can establish that some methods of abortion are morally impermissible.((Boonin, 193-194))
     * Blaise: Yes, but the point of the distinction is whether or not your actions //or omissions// are what //causes// the death directly and intentionally -- not whether you kill someone by your direct action or by your direct omission. The cause of death is a medically unnecessary hysterotomy, not some disease or illness.     * Blaise: Yes, but the point of the distinction is whether or not your actions //or omissions// are what //causes// the death directly and intentionally -- not whether you kill someone by your direct action or by your direct omission. The cause of death is a medically unnecessary hysterotomy, not some disease or illness.
     * Boonin tries to respond to the claim that a hysterotomy is initiating a fatal sequence of events whereas unplugging yourself from the violinist is merely allowing a fatal sequences of events to proceed by saying... "we should similarly say that removing the fetus allows to continue a fatal sequence of events that began when the fetus was conceived with the genetic disposition to have insufficient lung development for independent survive at an early stage in its development. Granted, this is a agenetic disposition that all human beings have..."((Boonin, 197))     * Boonin tries to respond to the claim that a hysterotomy is initiating a fatal sequence of events whereas unplugging yourself from the violinist is merely allowing a fatal sequences of events to proceed by saying... "we should similarly say that removing the fetus allows to continue a fatal sequence of events that began when the fetus was conceived with the genetic disposition to have insufficient lung development for independent survive at an early stage in its development. Granted, this is a agenetic disposition that all human beings have..."((Boonin, 197))
Line 184: Line 198:
       * Blaise: Plus, that would be grounds for the morally permissibility of letting an infant die because a fatal sequence of events has already initiated at conception whereby the infant is not sufficiently developed to feed herself...        * Blaise: Plus, that would be grounds for the morally permissibility of letting an infant die because a fatal sequence of events has already initiated at conception whereby the infant is not sufficiently developed to feed herself... 
 ==== The Intending Versus Foreseeing Objection ==== ==== The Intending Versus Foreseeing Objection ====
 +FIXME rest of the chapter
 +==== De Facto Guardian ====
 +FIXME
 +Paper from Justice for all that dives extensively into the De Facto Guardian argument (includes the "Up" analogy, woman in the cabin analogy, etc.)
 +*http://doc.jfaweb.org/Training/DeFactoGuardian-v03.pdf