Transcript ABORTION

Wednesday 23rd October 2013
Applying Kant’s theory
L.O We are learning how Kant’s
theory applies to abortion and
homosexuality
Starter:
What is your gut instinctDo you think Kant would approve of abortion or
homosexuality?

a.
b.
c.
d.
A Kantian ethicist must consider:
The principle of duty
The rejection of happiness as a basis
for moral decision-making
The rejection of love as a basis for
moral decision-making
The importance of the individual and
the immortality of the soul.

1.
The following issues should also be
taken into account for a Kantian
approach to abortion:
The preservation of life –
The individual has a moral duty to
preserve life. A comparison can be
made between abortion and 2 ethical
issues that Kant wrote about:
SUICIDE
WAR


He was critical of suicide, because
humans have a duty to preserve life. To
take one’s own life was therefore wrong.
He was also critical of warfare and
argued that rational humans should work
towards ‘perpetual peace’. The
preservation of life is again central to his
understanding of war and peace.

There is one reason for abortion that
might be allowed. This is when the life of
the mother is threatened by the
pregnancy. The preservation of her life
is imperative.
2. The principle of extreme duty.
 By duty, Kant is referring to things that
are difficult or are performed against
your natural instincts.
For example, bringing up a child in
difficult circumstances may be
considered an example of extreme duty.
An abortion might seem an easier
option.


Critics of this view argue that life is not
an endurance test. Therefore it is best
for foetuses with severe abnormalities to
be aborted rather than for the parents to
live the often difficult life of carers.
Having an abortion might also be seen
as an example of extreme duty if it is
deemed advisable by medical specialists,
but goes against the natural instincts of
the woman.
3. Happiness has no part to play in any
ethical decision-making.
A deontological approach to abortion is
not interested in the happiness of the
woman. Rather it asks her to consider
her duties towards herself, her partner,
any existing children and the foetus.
4. Moral decisions should not be based
on love or sympathy.
This may appear harsh. A young woman
is raped and gets pregnant. She does
not want to keep the child as it will
remind her of this traumatic event.
Situation ethicists would argue that in
this situation an abortion is the most
agapeistic thing to do. Kant would argue
that love and sympathy should be set
aside. The vital thing is to perform your
moral duty.
5. The problem of universalisability
 Universalisability relies on people being
rational.
 Kant recognises that human nature is
not always rational.
 However, this fact should not stop
people trying to search for moral
certainty.
 Kant believes the Categorical Imperative
will help individuals to make rational
moral choices.


To test universalisability, we could take
the example of a woman who decides,
after a scan, that she does not want a
daughter. Suppose every woman only
wanted a son and decided to abort all
female foetuses. The result would be
that the human race would die out. This
conflicts with Kant’s principle of the
preservation of life.
Therefore, abortion fails the test of
universalisability.
6. Treating humanity as an end and
not a means to an end.
 We should never treat humanity as a
means to an end.
 Kant would argue that it is wrong to
abort a foetus because of its sex because
the woman is treating the foetus as a
means to an end, i.e. a way to fulfil her
desire for a son, rather than an end in
itself.