Relationship Between Thompson's 'And Marquis' Argument
Denisha Smallwood
Quiz 4
1 )The relationship between Thompson’s and Marquis’ arguments are very different, but I believe both are compatible with each other. They both take the personhood out of the question, so there is no debate on if the fetus is a human in the womb. Marquis discusses voluntary conception and Thompson does not really discuss that. Thompson’s conclusion deals more with the exceptional cases that Marquis doesn’t explain at all. Thompson weighs the rights of the individuals involved in the pregnancy like the mother and fetus against each other. Marquis, on the other hand, focuses on the concept of what makes killing wrong thus killing a fetus that could possibly have a future like ours is bad. His conclusion focuses on the rights of the victim in the mother/fetus situation. The mortality of the situation in both arguments deals with which person’s rights out ways the other’s. In Marquis, the fetus’ rights outweigh the mother’s rights. In Thompson’s argument, the mother’s rights can trump the fetus’ rights in certain circumstance. …show more content…
Laws of physics is the core of determinism and without it determinism isn’t determinism. The main issue is the concept of “can” and the concept of “law” is where the incompatibility stems from. Determinism requires that the conjunction of a proposition(A) with the laws of physics would entail another proposition (B). If the modern science causes for the laws of physics to be rendered false then A would be false, but B could be true. This would mean one of two things. Someone could have free will since they can do something that would prove a law of physics false. Or the law of physics is false and not a real law of physics as determined by modern science. This would mean that determinism could still be
Quiz 4
1 )The relationship between Thompson’s and Marquis’ arguments are very different, but I believe both are compatible with each other. They both take the personhood out of the question, so there is no debate on if the fetus is a human in the womb. Marquis discusses voluntary conception and Thompson does not really discuss that. Thompson’s conclusion deals more with the exceptional cases that Marquis doesn’t explain at all. Thompson weighs the rights of the individuals involved in the pregnancy like the mother and fetus against each other. Marquis, on the other hand, focuses on the concept of what makes killing wrong thus killing a fetus that could possibly have a future like ours is bad. His conclusion focuses on the rights of the victim in the mother/fetus situation. The mortality of the situation in both arguments deals with which person’s rights out ways the other’s. In Marquis, the fetus’ rights outweigh the mother’s rights. In Thompson’s argument, the mother’s rights can trump the fetus’ rights in certain circumstance. …show more content…
Laws of physics is the core of determinism and without it determinism isn’t determinism. The main issue is the concept of “can” and the concept of “law” is where the incompatibility stems from. Determinism requires that the conjunction of a proposition(A) with the laws of physics would entail another proposition (B). If the modern science causes for the laws of physics to be rendered false then A would be false, but B could be true. This would mean one of two things. Someone could have free will since they can do something that would prove a law of physics false. Or the law of physics is false and not a real law of physics as determined by modern science. This would mean that determinism could still be