phil paper1

phil paper1 - Jannat Amarnani Phil-140 17/02/07 Mark...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Jannat Amarnani Phil-140 17/02/07 Mark Schroeder Philosophy Paper During superficial reading it is hard to see a connection between the issues Judith Jarvis Thompson and Peter Singer deal with, but under further examination, we can see a relation between what they are trying to say. Their basic point they are trying to make is do we as humans have a moral obligation to keep people alive whether they contain our genetic code or whether they live a thousand miles away. Both these philosophers’ beliefs are completely different on the issue of moral obligations to save lives. Singer believes that “people dying from lack of food, shelter and medical care” (pg.455) is bad which is why it is our moral duty to save them, whilst Thompson thinks that a fetus is not a person yet making abortion justified. Thompson’s views analyzed on a deeper level are much more practical and applicable to real life situations than Singer’s is. Singer thinks that activities such as going for a movie are wrong and that we should donate that money to people who are actually suffering. Thompson’s argument on the other hand, considers several cases where the mother’s right to life is more important the fetus’s life, since the fetus is not considered a person yet. I agree with Thompson’s view and disagree with what Singer believes, which leads to my thesis. Although saving and helping lives are what we are intuitively inclined to believe, we should have the choice and the right to act in the way we feel is appropriate to the situation.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Singer’s argument is structured too rigidly, his central point that is people suffering from lack of food, shelter and medical care is bad and therefore, if we are able to, it is our moral obligation to help those people. He does not view the other side to the argument, where giving money to suffering individuals might not actually help them in morally significant way as Singer hopes. In Thompson’s argument, she presents several
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/27/2008 for the course PHIL 140g taught by Professor Kwon during the Spring '07 term at USC.

Page1 / 5

phil paper1 - Jannat Amarnani Phil-140 17/02/07 Mark...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online