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 [2016/10/01 11:36] – balleyneutsfl:classroom:seminars:pba310y [2023/06/12 09:04] (current) – mmccann
Line 6: Line 6:
  
 ===== 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]]
Line 35: 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 171: 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 192: Line 199:
 ==== The Intending Versus Foreseeing Objection ==== ==== The Intending Versus Foreseeing Objection ====
 FIXME rest of the chapter 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