In-class discussion:
Part I:
Applying Rawls to the problem of abortion
Instructions: divide class into 5 groups - 1 group will represent one of the cases presented on the CD (i.e., Carol, Lisa, Lydia, and Sue): the last group will represent the panel of judges who must decide the appropriate laws.
[review Roe v. Wade decision]
Rawls
If we understand the function of
Rawls's notion of a veil of ignorance as a way of seeking
to achieve objectivity in our moral judgments...
using Rawls's veil of ignorance approach,
and considering the cases of
(1) Carol (esp. #7 on the issue of fairness)
(2) Lisa
(3) Lydia (esp. #6 on the question of fairness to society)
(4) Sue
[finish reviewing these cases in class]
each group (1-4): keeping in mind especially the point of view of your case - consider what laws you would prescribe concerning abortion in a just society, keeping in mind that "ahead of time," you do not know whether you will land in this society as
the unborn child;
the teenage female pregnant by a male who has now abandoned her;
the male who has enjoyed the sexual/emotional relationship, but is not ready or willing to take on the responsibilities of parenting;
the family of the teenage female;
the community and society at large who may well have to bear some of the costs of bearing and raising the child;
other stakeholders? (e.g. - would our laws change if we took seriously the idea that other living things, constituting the ecosystem which makes our lives possible, should also have a "voice" in these decisions - especially as these decisions affect their very survival? --
environmental/Buddhist ethics)
Prepare to present and argue for your prescription before the panel of judges.
Judges:
be prepared to decide on which set of specific laws you
can justify as most appropriate for a democratic - but secular
- society.
Part II: The Problem of Abortion in a Pluralistic Society
Assignment for Thursday, April
16, 1998
a) After discussion of its particular case, each group post on the board "your" position on abortion (i.e., using the "histogram", attached);
[judges do the same]
b) review the "Public Opinion" page from The Issue of Abortion in America CD (handout)
How do our views compare with those reported on the "Public Opinion" page?
Are there strong agreements? Strong differences?
What do these agreements and differences
suggest?
c) Group work:
Arthur, ch. 7, Abortion
1: Abortion as Constitutionally Protected: Roe v. Wade 183
2: Judith Jarvis Thomson, A Defense of Abortion 188
3: Baruch Brody, Opposition to Abortion: A Human Rights Approach 196
4: Mary Anne Warren, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion 204
Note: you may find my summaries of these positions helpful introductions: see
http://www.drury.edu/faculty/ess/values/Abortion.html
5: Ess, Religious Perspectives on Abortion
http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/caae/Home/Forum/abortion/background/bkground.html
[This group will review the materials
collected here representing Jewish, Christian, and Islamic views
on the questions "when does human life begin?" and "when,
and under what circumstances, is abortion justified in these traditions?"
Our conversation on Thursday:
A) after ca. 15 minutes in-class review and preparation in group - each group will present a summary of the arguments developed in their reading (no more than 10 minutes each).
B) both individual groups and the class at large will discuss their subsequent responses to the following questions:
1) Of the arguments presented against abortion - which seems the strongest or most compelling?
What are the chief weaknesses or
flaws in this argument/these arguments?
2) Of the arguments presented in support of abortion - which seems the strongest or most compelling?
What are the chief weaknesses or
flaws in this argument/these arguments?
C) Informal writing - due by April 30, 1998
Not a formal paper, not a final exam - but an informal essay on a major ethical topic (preferably one we have examined in class, such as abortion, human rights, etc.) Typed or wordprocessed, I will expect minimal documentation of sources - but beyond minimal expections (documentation, organization, clarity of expression, etc.) I will not grade these as a formal paper.
Abortion
For this topic, begin with the questions in "B" above (arguments against and for abortion). After responding to these,
3) What does the lack of consensus regarding the abortion issue mean? That is, how should we establish the laws regarding abortion in a society constructed around representative (not plebescite) democracy and First Amendment prohibitions against the establishment of religion (where diverse religious beliefs - both within Christianity and among Jews, Christians, Muslims, etc. - define beliefs concerning when human life begins and under what circumstances, if any, abortion is permissable)?
Is Rawls's veil of ignorance
helpful in responding to this issue? If so, how?
===
Assignment for Tuesday, April 21, 1998
Boss, ch. 10, "Rights Ethics" - pp. 341-360
Arthur, ch. 4 "Relativism and Human Rights"
Claude Ake, "The African Context of Human Rights," pp. 103-107
Editors, Harvard Law Review,
"What's Culture Got to Do with it?..." 108-115
Additional comment: the "spoilage clause" in John Locke's labor theory of property as a hedge against excessive acquisition of property.
Especially taking this "spoilage clause" into account, be prepared to discuss
Boss, 352f., #4, 5, 6, 7
Informal Writing:
Boss:
360f. #3 - MODIFIED: Using Rawls' conception of justice as fairness and presuming that you are standing behind the veil of ignorance in developing a just and fair economic system - what economic system(s) could you justify as the best "for optimizing humanfreedom while nurturing community and interdependence"?
360 #4 - NOTE: as you consider this
question, you may find it helpful to review our materials and
discussion of the prophetic traditions of Judaism and Christianity.
In response to the two articles in Arthur:
a) are there universal human rights, as the Editors of the Harvard Law Review claim?
If so, how would we know what these are?
If you argue that there are universal human rights - how do you defend your claims against the Marxist critiques - echoed by Ake - that Western conceptions of human rights are really the ideological ally of laissez-faire capitalism and its alleged oppression and exploitation?
(You may want to refer back to Kant, Bok, Ross, and/or Rawls to justify your claims).
b) Should other nations make any effort to abolish the practice of female "circumcision" (clitorectomy) as practiced in some tribes and countries, as the Editors of the Harvard Law Review argue?
How would you support your position?
==
The problem of abortion: do we have any duties to protect the life of the unborn?
Cases?
rape
teenage pregnancy
(fetal deformation, contraceptive
failure)
Question 1:
what is your personal response to these cases?
what arguments can you develop to support your response?
given these arguments - what assumptions
underlie your position?
Question 2:
what ethical guidelines regarding these cases can we develop using
ethical egoism
utilitarianism (Mill)
Kantian deontology?
We now add:
Sisela Bok, On Lying
W.D. Ross's conception of prima facia duties
John Rawl's conception of justice
as fairness
how do these guidelines fit
or square with your own position as developed in Question
1?
===
Web resource:
http://caae.phil.cmu.edu/caae/Home/Forum/abortion/background/bkground.html