Philosophy - Practical Ethics Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Philosophy - possible Ethics - Essay ExampleIn this paper I impart discuss the moral variance between abortion and infanticide with special reference to the views of Michael Tooley and Mary Anne Warren. Metaphysics is an area of philosophy that deals with questions having to do with the ultimate innovation and character of things in the world. It is concerned with such diverse topics as the mind/body problem, identity, God, the existence and nature of universals, the existence and nature of the soul, and so on. Thus, the morality of abortion, if it is to be construed as contingent upon the nature of the foetus, is an issue whose annunciation depends on which metaphysical view of the human person is correct. Given this, let us take a look at Michaels argument. Although he makes many provocative and interesting claims that deserve a reply, I will focus on a small portion of his essay that I believe is the core of his case. correspond to Michael, the first principle of religious l iberty is that laws will not be based upon abstract metaphysical speculation, but will be fashioned through the democratic processes in which every perspective is undetermined to critical analysis (Michael, 2000). Any proposal must be open either to revision or rejection. He and then goes on to cite, as an example of what is not speculative metaphysics, the viability archetype proposed by the beg in Roe. I will first critique Michaels use and defense of the viability standard and then drift on to a general critique of Michaels view of abstract metaphysical speculation. ... the viability standard in particular, fairly, sensibly, and in effect functions to safeguard the constitutional liberties of pregnant women while recognizing and accommodating the States interest in potence human life. The viability distribution channel reflects the biological details and truths of fetal development it marks the threshold moment prior to which a fetus cannot fit separate from the woman and cannot reasonably and objectively be regarded as a subject of rights or interests unequivocal from, or paramount to, those of the pregnant woman (Michael, 2000). At the same time, the viability standard takes account of the undeniable fact that as the fetus evolves into its postnatal form, and as it loses its dependence on the uterine environment, the States interest in the fetus potential human life, and in fostering a regard for human life in general, becomes compelling. Michaels argument for the viability standard is nearly identical to the one presented by Blackmun Part of the genius in Roe v. Wade (now confirm in Casey) was putting forward the standard of viability that stage of development at which the fetus has sufficient neurologic and physical maturation to survive outside the womb. Prior to that, the fetus simply is not sufficiently positive as an independent being deserving and requiring the full protection of the law, i.e., a person (Michael, 2000). The notion of via bility correlates biological maturation with personal identity in a way that can be recognized and authoritative by reasonable people. Michaels use of the viability standard is seriously flawed. First, he praises the Courts legal use of the standard and then employs the standard as a decisive moment at which he believes it is reasonable to say that the fetus becomes a person, even though that is