This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Mill, Subjection of Women I I Mill, ch. 3: Let us take, then, the only marked case which observation affords, of apparent inferiority of women to men, if we except the merely physical one of bodily strength. No production in philosophy, science, or art, entitled to the first rank, has been the work of a woman. Is there any mode of accounting for this, without supposing that women are naturally incapable of producing them? How does Mill answer this question? What do you think of his answer? Is Mill anticipating the phenomenon of “political correctness” by refusing to face the statistical facts about women’s accomplishments and what they entail about their abilities? Abortion readings I 1. John Paul relies on “natural law,” which presumably originates in the supernatural world of God’s commands. The closest thing to an argument in his piece is that, as genetic science shows us, the fertilized egg is already a living human being. I t is always wrong to kill an innocent human being, and so even early abortion is wrong. What do you think of this argument? What would Thompson make of it? What would Ted Turner say? If it really is t rue that fertilized eggs are human life, what should we make of the fact that 40% of pregnancies are spontaneously aborted, and nobody seems to care? Why isn’t it OK to kill abortion doctors to save zygotes? 2. Is Warren’s moral thinking closer to Mill’s or to Plato’s? 3. Warren thinks anti-abortion thinkers beg the question or assume what has to be proven when they argue that killing fetuses is wrong because killing innocent human beings is wrong. Explain her idea. 4. Warren thinks that “personhood” is the criterion we should use in assessing who is in the “moral community.” who is in the “moral community....
View Full Document
- Fall '07
- human beings, Marquis, Gensler