Abortion: Introduction

Summary

The speaker discusses their dissertation on abortion, which became relevant again after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. They emphasize the importance of ethical debate over legal issues in an academic setting, highlighting the need for respectful discourse. The speaker, who identifies as pro-choice, stresses the class's focus on examining arguments from both sides, aiming to show that smart and sincere people can hold opposing views. They caution against conflating agreement with a conclusion with the quality of the argument and encourage critical thinking about the empirical data that underpins moral disagreements on abortion.

Takeaways

• 📜 The speaker began working on their dissertation on abortion around 2006-2007, initially concerned about its relevance given the long-standing Roe v. Wade decision.
• 🔄 The topic of abortion has regained relevance due to the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court, leaving the legality of abortion to state decisions and leading to its reclassification as illegal in many states.
• 🏫 The focus of the class is on the ethics of abortion, not the legal aspects, as it is an ethics class rather than a law class.
• 🙋‍♂️ The speaker clarifies their personal stance as pro-choice but emphasizes that the class is not about persuading students to adopt a particular viewpoint.
• 🤔 The class aims to explore the ethical arguments on both sides of the abortion debate, treating each with respect and acknowledging the presence of intelligent and sincere individuals on both sides.
• 🤝 The speaker encourages students to consider arguments from the opposing side, aiming for understanding and acknowledging the complexity of the issue.
• 🚫 The academic debate on abortion is distinguished from public protests and debates, where arguments may be dismissed based on emotions rather than intellectual merit.
• 🤓 The speaker warns against conflating agreement with a conclusion with the quality of the argument, urging students to critically evaluate the logic and evidence behind each argument.
• 🧐 Disagreements over abortion often stem from differing empirical beliefs rather than fundamental moral disagreements, suggesting that people can share moral values but diverge based on scientific or factual assumptions.
• 📊 The speaker has narrowed down the discussion to focus on a few key arguments from each side, presented in subsequent videos, to facilitate a more concise and focused examination of the topic.

Q & A

When did the speaker start working on their dissertation on abortion?

The speaker started working on their dissertation on abortion around the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2007.

What was the speaker's initial concern about writing a dissertation on abortion?

The speaker was initially concerned that the topic might be irrelevant since Roe versus Wade had been the law of the land for a long time and they weren't sure if there was anything new to contribute to the debate.

What recent development made the speaker's dissertation on abortion relevant again?

The recent development that made the speaker's dissertation relevant again was the overturning of Roe versus Wade by the Supreme Court, which left the legality of abortion up to individual states.

What is the focus of the class the speaker is teaching?

The focus of the class the speaker is teaching is the ethics of abortion, not the legal issues.

What is the speaker's stance on the abortion debate?

The speaker is pro-choice, but emphasizes that their personal stance is not the focus of the class, which aims to examine arguments from both sides of the debate.

Why does the speaker believe that people tend to have strong opinions on abortion, rather than neutral ones?

The speaker believes that people tend to have strong opinions on abortion because it is a deeply personal and moral issue, and people typically align strongly with either a pro-life or pro-choice perspective.

How does the speaker describe the academic debate on abortion compared to public debates?

The speaker describes the academic debate on abortion as one where both sides are treated with respect, without portraying one side as dumb, backwards, or evil. It is a space for examining arguments from respected scholars and understanding that well-intentioned people can disagree.

What is the speaker's approach to presenting arguments in the class?

The speaker's approach is to present reasonable arguments on both sides of the abortion debate, encouraging students to understand why smart and sincere people might hold different views, even if they disagree with them.

Why does the speaker caution students about agreeing with an argument just because they agree with its conclusion?

The speaker cautions students about this because agreeing with a conclusion does not automatically mean the argument supporting it is valid. It's important to evaluate the quality of the argument itself, not just its outcome.

What does the speaker suggest is often the root of disagreements in the abortion debate?

The speaker suggests that often the root of disagreements in the abortion debate is not a fundamental moral disagreement, but rather differences in empirical beliefs or assumptions about facts and science.

How does the speaker plan to structure the discussion on abortion in the class?

The speaker plans to structure the discussion by presenting a few of what they consider the best arguments on both sides of the abortion debate, examining them in different videos, and then making some concluding remarks.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Relevance of Dissertation on Abortion

The speaker begins by sharing their journey of writing a dissertation on abortion around 2007, expressing initial concerns about the topic's relevance given the longstanding legal status of Roe v. Wade. However, with new discussions on fetal pain emerging, they decided to proceed. The recent overturning of Roe v. Wade by the Supreme Court has made their work relevant again, which they find unfortunate as it leaves the legality of abortion to state decisions, leading to its prohibition in many states. The speaker clarifies that their ethics class will focus on the ethical aspects of abortion rather than the legal ones. They emphasize the importance of academic debate, where both sides are treated with respect, and the goal is not to change beliefs but to engage in thoughtful discussion. The speaker identifies as pro-choice but stresses that the class is about exploring arguments from respected scholars, not about imposing personal views.

05:01

🤔 Understanding the Complexity of Abortion Debates

The speaker encourages open-mindedness in the abortion debate, suggesting that individuals, regardless of their stance, should be willing to understand the arguments on the other side. They hope that pro-choice individuals will recognize the validity of pro-life arguments and vice versa, even if they maintain their own views. The speaker warns against conflating agreement with a conclusion with the quality of the argument supporting it, highlighting the importance of critically evaluating arguments on their merits. They also note that disagreements often stem from empirical differences rather than moral ones, suggesting that people might align on moral grounds if they agreed on certain scientific facts about fetal development and consciousness.

10:02

📚 Narrowing Down Arguments in Abortion Debate

The speaker concludes by mentioning that they have distilled the discussion to focus on a few key arguments from both sides of the abortion debate. They plan to present these arguments in subsequent videos, aiming to treat each side fairly. The speaker reiterates their pro-choice stance upfront to establish transparency about their perspective but emphasizes that the goal is to explore the arguments without bias. They invite students to engage with the material critically and to enjoy the intellectual challenge of examining a complex and emotionally charged issue.

Keywords

💡Abortion

Abortion refers to the termination of a pregnancy before the fetus is capable of surviving outside the womb. It is a central theme in the video, as the speaker discusses their dissertation and the ethical debate surrounding it. The speaker mentions that the topic has become relevant again due to changes in legal status, indicating the complexity and evolving nature of the issue.

💡Roe v. Wade

Roe v. Wade is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion across the United States. The video script references this case as it was overturned, making abortion legality a state-by-state decision, thus rekindling the relevance of the speaker's dissertation.

💡Ethics

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that deals with moral principles, values, and judgments about what is right and wrong. The video is focused on the ethics of abortion rather than the legal aspects, as the speaker clarifies that the class is an ethics class, not a law class.

💡Pro-choice

Pro-choice is a term used to describe the stance in favor of a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. The speaker identifies as pro-choice but emphasizes that the class is not about persuading students to adopt the speaker's viewpoint.

💡Pro-life

Pro-life is a term used to describe the stance opposing abortion, valuing the life of the fetus from conception. The speaker acknowledges the presence of intelligent and sincere individuals on both sides of the debate, including the pro-life perspective.

💡Academic Debate

Academic debate refers to a formal discussion or argument on a topic, often within an educational setting, where the goal is to explore different viewpoints and critically evaluate arguments. The speaker contrasts academic debate with public debate, emphasizing the importance of respectful discourse and critical thinking.

💡Empirical Data

Empirical data refers to information that is based on observation and experimentation. In the context of the video, the speaker suggests that disagreements over abortion might stem from differing interpretations of empirical data, such as fetal development and consciousness, rather than moral principles.

💡Fetal Pain

Fetal pain is a concept discussed in the video script, referring to the capacity of a fetus to experience pain. It is mentioned as one of the topics that the speaker initially considered irrelevant but later found to be a part of the ongoing debate about abortion.

💡Moral Disagreements

Moral disagreements are conflicts in beliefs about what is morally right or wrong. The speaker argues that often, people on both sides of the abortion debate may not fundamentally disagree on moral principles but rather on the empirical facts that influence their moral conclusions.

💡Critical Thinking

Critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information objectively to form judgments. The speaker emphasizes the importance of critical thinking in evaluating arguments, cautioning against accepting poor arguments simply because they lead to a favored conclusion.

💡Bias

Bias refers to a prejudice or inclination that can influence one's judgment or decision-making. The speaker openly discloses their pro-choice bias at the beginning to set expectations and encourages students to critically evaluate the arguments presented, regardless of the speaker's personal stance.

Highlights

Began work on dissertation on abortion around 2006-2007.

Initially concerned about the relevance of the topic due to the long-standing Roe v. Wade decision.

Decided to write on abortion due to emerging discussions on fetal pain.

Roe v. Wade has been overturned, making the dissertation relevant again.

The class focuses on the ethics of abortion, not legal issues.

Academic debate differs from public debate; it's not about convincing others of one's stance.

People typically have strong stances on abortion, either pro-life or pro-choice.

The instructor is pro-choice but emphasizes the class is about critical thinking, not persuasion.

Academic debates should not portray one side as inferior or malicious.

Both sides of the abortion debate have intelligent and sincere proponents.

Disagreements often stem from different assumptions rather than fundamental moral differences.

The debate is complex, with neither side being obviously wrong.

Encourages students to understand opposing views, even if they disagree.

Agreement with a conclusion does not necessarily mean the argument supporting it is valid.

Students should evaluate arguments critically, regardless of their conclusion.

Disagreements may be based on empirical data rather than moral principles.

The instructor will present a few of the best arguments from both sides.

The goal is to treat both sides fairly and encourage critical thinking about the issue.

Transcripts

at the end of around 2006 beginning of

2007 I started working on what is now my

Dusty old dissertation on uh uh and for

my PhD on abortion and so I wrote this

starting like I said around 2007 is when

I started writing it and I was worried

at the time that it was kind of

irrelevant that you know Row versus

weight had been the law of the land for

so long and uh I didn't know if there

was anything left to be said in the

debate U but there were some things

being written about fetal pain and stuff

like that so I decided I would go ahead

and write my dissertation on um abortion

and lo and behold it is relevant again

uh I don't think it's a good thing

personally that my dissertation is

relevant again uh as you know uh Ro

versus Wade has been turned over by the

Supreme Court and so um it leaves it up

to states to decide whether or not

abortion should be legal in that state

and many states um have made it illegal

um so all of a sudden um abortion is a

relevant topic

again what I what we focus on in our

class of course is not the legal issues

this isn't a law class this is instead

an ethics class and so we're going to

talk about the ethics of abortion now I

have to say at the outset that debating

abortion discussing abortion in an

academic class in a philosophy class is

different than discussing discussing

abortion um outside of that we're not

protesting we're not uh trying to um

make sure that somebody believes uh what

we believe before we leave the room or

anything like that um you're going to

find that no matter what side you start

on and that's one of these things where

you know with abortion um people don't

really have a neutral stance uh people

are typically either strongly um

pro-life or pro-choice and um I'm

pro-choice uh doesn't matter what I am

because this that's not what this class

isn't about making you think what I

think I don't care what you think about

um this issue U but uh you'll notice

that um in the academic debates we're

not going to portray one side as dumb or

backwards or evil or something like that

uh this is if if you haven't experienced

it already no matter what side you take

on the issue you're going to find really

smart people on the other side and

you're going to find really sincere good

people on the other side so in the

protests and in the public debate you'll

often hear um maybe the pro uh Choice

people saying that uh the pro-life

people are dumb backwards not listening

to medicine or science and you might

hear the pro-life people saying that um

the pro-choice people are evil like to

kill babies something like that right U

that's not what the academic debate is

we're going to examine arguments on both

sides from very respected Scholars from

people who are intelligent bright and

sincere sorry I'm moving my camera

around a little bit

um and we're going to see that

well-intentioned people can disagree and

it's often the case that people on

either side don't really have that many

moral like foundational moral

disagreements they might agree on their

moral commitments but they might

disagree on some crucial assumptions

that in fact are you know not black and

white and so you can have people agre

agreeing on the basic principles of

morality um but still come to different

positions on abortion because they have

very nuanced and nuanced different um

takes on some empirical ideas some

factual ideas and just because of those

little differences they disagree and so

we're not going to enter this debate

looking for ways to call one side stupid

or one side evil or anything like that

and I'm going to present to you

reasonable arguments on both sides um

and you know you'll see that um there

are good people and smart people on both

sides of the debate uh throughout the

what we're U throughout the discussion

so it is a complex issue and I say that

neither side is obviously wrong on the

issue what I mean by that is not that

neither side is wrong they're saying

opposite things so one side is wrong

right but that neither side is obviously

wrong in that these are they're good

arguments that you could see so I'm

hoping that if you're um coming into

this as a pro-choice person like myself

that you'll read and listen to some

pro-life arguments and go you know what

that I can understand why somebody would

believe that right a smart person could

could agree with that if you're pro-life

and coming into this I hope that as you

see um listen to the debate you'll go I

can see why a sincere good person a

smart sincere good person might believe

that even though I still disagree with

it right you might what no matter what

side you're on you're going to disagree

with one side um even though I disagree

with it I can see why a smart person

would or a good person would agree with

that argument so that's why I say

neither side is obviously wrong because

these are there's good reasons to agree

with either

side um one thing I want to caution you

about because this is an emot topic is

that agreeing with a conclusion doesn't

mean you have to agree with a particular

argument so um a lot of times and I

talked about this in my critical

thinking classes a lot um a lot of times

if we agree with the conclusion then we

just automatically say the argument is

good but that doesn't follow there can

be a bad argument that has a conclusion

that we agree with and so as a good

philosophically thinking as a good

ethically thinking person we should say

something like oh wait that argument has

a conclusion I agree with but it's still

not a good argument or on the other hand

that argument has a conclusion that I

disagree with um but I can still admit

that it's a decent argument right and so

just because you agree with a conclusion

a lot of people will rush to to agree

with a conclusion that's just bad uh

because they agree with the conclusion

they'll agree with an argument that's

just bad so in uh some of my classes I

will give an example of an invalid

argument that concludes abortion is

immoral and students who come into the

discussion pro-life will typically look

at that argument and say it's a good

argument even though it's technically

bad I mean it it the premises the

conclusion doesn't follow from the

premises it's an invalid argument but

and people who are pro-choice will

automatically say it's wrong right

because of the conclusion but we want to

be able to evaluate the argument so

let's say that I present and I'm only

going to present a couple arguments on

each side but let's say I present a

pro-life argument and um then point out

that you know it concludes that abortion

is immoral and let's say that you're

pro-life and um it turns out that I

bring up criticisms of that argument

that show that that argument is wrong

and maybe we show criticisms of all the

arguments and on the pro-life side let's

say and show that those arguments are

bad that doesn't mean then that you that

there aren't any good pro-life arguments

it just means that the pro-life

arguments that We examined um which I

hope I picked the best ones um that

those particular arguments aren't good

and you can agree with that you can say

yes I still agree that abortion is

immoral if you're a pro-life person but

um these arguments have flaws in them

you can do that same if you're

pro-choice and we have a conclusion that

says you know therefore uh it's morally

permissible for a woman to get an

abortion these circumstances and you can

say uh yeah I agree with the conclusion

but the argument to get there is bad

right so you could disagree with it and

the other way around like I said you can

say oh that's a good argument I don't

agree with the conclusion I don't really

know why I'm rejecting the argument

because it sounds pretty good but I feel

like there's more weight uh of evidence

on the other side right so just as

you're going into this discussion keep

in mind that um you don't have to agree

with an argument just because you agree

agree with a

conclusion also something to think about

as we look at this is that oftentimes

the disagreements that people have and I

kind of mentioned this before over the

issue isn't a disagreement about

morality uh rather it might be a dis

agreement on the empirical side on

empirical data data that's objective and

scientific um it might be the the

disagreement over the empirical data um

leads the people to the different sides

but they might agree uh on morality so

for example a pro choice uh person who's

pro-choice might agree um with a person

who's pro-life if they had similar

beliefs about for instance fetal

development so if they both agreed that

um they there was conscious life from

the be from conception that a fetus

experienced pain that a fetus has

conscious life that a zygo has conscious

life then if they agreed with that then

they would agree with each other on the

morality of the issue but because they

disagree on the empirical data the

scientific data they come to different

moral sides and so sometimes it's not

even a moral disagreement that the sides

are having it's rather an empirical

disagreement so those are some things to

keep in mind as we introduce this topic

and so what I've done is it used to have

this really long section on abortion um

I've narrowed that down now um to just a

couple of what I consider the best

arguments on both sides and so we'll

look at a couple of arguments on either

side and then um I'll present them in

different videos and then we'll um make

some concluding remarks so that's where

we're headed so again uh when we talk

about controversial issues have to be

worried about them U because we're going

to try to treat both sides fairly if and

I I'd like to tell students where I'm at

at the beginning like I said I'm

pro-choice um because if you feel like

I'm being disingenuous or you feel like

I'm um um being biased then you know

where my bias is coming from and feel

free to say so in the comments or in

your uh posts or anything like that

anyway I hope you enjoy this material uh

enjoy I guess is a weird word for

abortion um but I hope you enjoy

thinking about the issue and um let's

dive into some pro-life arguments