Thursday, July 21, 2016

Thomson's People Seed Case

From guest blogger, Alex.

In class, we discussed the "People Seed" scenario. This struck particular interest to me, because I disagreed with the root of the argument. In this claim, it was said that since it is your house, you have the right to do whatever with the seed you choose. Correct, it is your house. However, the way the seed got to the carpet is where I see the fault. First, it was your choice to live next to the tree. No one forced you to live here, in this situation. If someone did i.e. rape, I have a different opinion which I will not discuss in this post. However, this circumstance says you chose to live there. That means you are open to the fact that a people seed may land on your carpet. If you accept this, you accept the fact that there's a chance a human life will land in your house. Next, the window. You can live next to the tree, and close your window. If you get the correctly protected window, a seed will not have access into your house. With maximum use of protection, by whatever means necessary, the seed will not have access into your house. Given these two statements, I firmly believe that it is on you if a seed falls on your carpet, and you must face the consequences. Without bringing religion into this, humans are put on this earth to help each other. If you don't accept this, imagine a world in which everyone only worried about themselves and had no concern for any other life on this planet. It wouldn't function.

Another situation was if a burglar moved into your house for six months because he needed your house for food, and living conditions. I see this as a faulted situation. There is one big difference between someone needing your house and food and abortion. The baby needs YOU to survive, and it needs your physical body. Not anyone else, just the body that it is in. The burglar needs your food, it needs external belongings. It doesn't need your physical body to survive. There are many other identical forms of food, or housing that will provide identical benefits. As hard as it is to get the burglar out of your house or get him food, it can be done. This is impossible with the baby. It needs you.

2 comments:

Bethany Vanderhoof said...

I definitely agree with your stance that, in the case of the people seed, one does not have the right to destroy the seed if it becomes planted in the carpet. This scenario models natural pregnancy, not pregnancy that is a result of rape or endangerment of the mother's life. Naturally occurring pregnancy is different because a person who consentingly engages in sexual relations must recognize the risk of becoming pregnant. If the necessary precautions are not taken and a woman becomes pregnant, then I believe that she is responsible for carrying the child to term.

Michael Eppink said...

I also agree with you. The intuition that you have a right to kill an innocent person if they land in your carpet because of no fault of their own did not come naturally to me. If a people seed carrying the full moral weight of a person lands in my carpet because I opened my window, I would not feel justified in killing it. Especially when there were so many actions I could have taken to prevent it from getting there.
I found this thought experiment so unconvincing I'd say it would be suited for someone arguing against abortion.