Hi guys, Welcome to the Advanced Video Search Engine, and you are watching Abortion and Personhood: What the Moral Dilemma Is Really About | Glenn Cohen | Big Think. That video is uploaded by Big Think at 2016-09-17T15:29:18-07:00. We are promoting this video only for entertainment and educational purpose only. So, I hope you like & enjoy it. [4ezS5vQ1j_E]
| Name | Abortion and Personhood: What the Moral Dilemma Is Really About | Glenn Cohen | Big Think |
| Video Uploader | Video From Big Think |
| Upload Date | This Video Uploaded At 17-09-2016 22:29:18 |
| Video Discription | Abortion and Personhood: What the Moral Dilemma Is Really About Watch the newest video from Big Think: https://bigth.ink/NewVideo Join Big Think Edge for exclusive videos: https://bigth.ink/Edge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The landmark Roe v. Wade decision, handed down by the United States Supreme Court in 1973, touched off a divide deep within the American culture that shows little signs of healing. The reason is not necessarily that people have intransigent views when it comes to abortion. Instead, the issue is genuinely hard to grapple with, even from a moral standpoint, as Harvard Law Professor and bioethicist Glenn Cohen explains. The first question we face when deciding whether abortion is immoral is this: are fetuses persons? That may seem like a straightforward question, but determining personhood requires understanding the distinction between a person, a human being, and being alive. Certainly not all things that are alive are persons. A dog, for example, is very much alive and very lovable indeed, but not a person. As simple as this distinction seems, it has its detractors. The philosopher Peter Singer, for example, says that distinguishing between what is human life and inhuman life is an example of speciation — an act of discrimination that is ultimately logically untenable (and we should therefore abandon it). According to Cohen, some scholars say that stem cells and embryos are human beings, but not persons. They are made of human being stuff but they do not have the moral and legal rights — namely, the right of inviolability — that we accord to individual persons. Those who believe the granting of rights is more a political act than a natural one may look toward what Cohen calls a "capacity 'x'," i.e. some other quality that more accurately defines what a person truly is. Examples of such a capacity 'x' include experiencing a continuity of identity, or possessing self-knowledge. While these qualities form more naturally than the granting of political rights, they open the door to difficult-to-justify actions like infanticide (since the infant brain is insufficiently developed to have the concept of an identity, or to articulate self-knowledge). If one decides to stick with a definition of "person" that is determined by the existence of moral and legal rights, thinkers such as Judith Jarvis Thomson point out that the rights of a mother countervail — she is a person, too, after all. Thomson's famous thought experiment, "the famous violinist" has become perhaps the most recognizable philosophical defense of abortion. Glenn Cohen's book is Patients with Passports: Medical Tourism, Law, and Ethics. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GLENN COHEN: PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL Prof. Glenn Cohen is one of the world's leading experts on the intersection of bioethics (sometimes also called "medical ethics") and the law, as well as health law. He also teaches civil procedure. From Seoul to Krakow to Vancouver, Professor Cohen has spoken at legal, medical, and industry conferences around the world and his work has appeared in or been covered on PBS, NPR, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, Mother Jones, the New York Times, the New Republic, the Boston Globe, and several other media venues. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSCRIPT: Glenn Cohen: In the 1970s we have the Roe v. Wade decision in the United States. It was a decision relating to a woman's right to have an abortion. It introduced the trimester framework. It basically allowed first trimester abortions, made it very difficult to have third trimester abortions. And essentially this was really met very quickly thereafter with the sort of backlash. And really the last 40/50 years of American history have more or less been a backlash against Roe v. Wade and an attempt to kind of criminalize abortion in all sorts of interesting ways without overturning the decision. So that's kind of the legal playing field. I mean we can talk about some of the specifics, but the more interesting question I think is thinking about the morality of abortion. And I'll say that I think abortion is an extremely difficult question. So one of the first questions people have to think about is are fetuses persons? And that's a very important linguistic question, persons. I didn't say human beings. I didn't say alive. Those are three different issues. Something can be alive but not be a person. Your dog is a good example. You love your dog. It's a wonderful thing but it's not a person. Something can be human and potentially not be a person... Read the full transcript at https://bigthink.com/videos/glenn-cohen-on-the-ethics-on-abortion 4ezS5vQ1j_E |
| Category | Education |
| Tags | Glenn Cohen | abortion | Roe v. Wade | women | choice | third trimester | criminalization | decision | law | legal | linguistics | personhood | animal rights | activism | activist | fetus | embryo | gestation | philosophy | Judith Jarvis Thompson | death | pregnant | unconscious | rape | prohibition | lawyers | Big Think | BigThink | BigThink.com | Education | Educational | Lifelong Learning | EDU | abortion debate | why abortion is wrong | abortion is wrong | abortion argument | is abortion right or wrong | abortion ethics | abortion is murder |
