Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'A Defense of Abortion' and 'Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


15 ideas

16. Persons / F. Free Will / 2. Sources of Free Will
The first motion or effect cannot be produced necessarily, so the First Cause must be a free agent [Reid]
     Full Idea: That the first motion, or the first effect, whatever it be, cannot be produced necessarily, and, consequently, that the First Cause must be a free agent, has been demonstrated clearly and unanswerably.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 8)
     A reaction: He has said that the First Cause can only be conceived by us as an 'agent'. If there is an agential First Cause, then he must be right. It is this need for God to be free which makes scepticism about free will unacceptable to many.
16. Persons / F. Free Will / 3. Constraints on the will
A willed action needs reasonable understanding of what is to be done [Reid]
     Full Idea: There can be no will without such a degree of understanding, at least, as gives the conception of that which we will.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 1)
     A reaction: Presumably this 'conception' includes an understanding of the probable consequences, but they are of infinite complexity. I see this as an objection to 'ultimate' free will and responsibility, because there are only ever degrees of understanding.
16. Persons / F. Free Will / 4. For Free Will
We are morally free, because we experience it, we are accountable, and we pursue projects [Reid]
     Full Idea: I believe in moral liberty first because we have a natural conviction of belief that in many cases we act freely, second because we are accountable, and third because we can prosecute an end by a long series of means adapted.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 5)
     A reaction: This is his final summary of why he believes in free will. Why didn't Plato and Aristotle have this natural belief? He could only believe we are 'accountable' because he believes in free will. Ants and bees pursue lengthy projects. Hm.
20. Action / C. Motives for Action / 3. Acting on Reason / a. Practical reason
A motive is merely an idea, like advice, and not a force for action [Reid]
     Full Idea: A motive is equally incapable of action and of passion; because it is not a thing that exists, but a thing that is conceived. …Motives may be compared to advice or exhortation.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 4)
     A reaction: We say people are motivated by greed or anger or love, which seems a bit stronger than mere advice.
21. Aesthetics / C. Artistic Issues / 7. Art and Morality
Musical performance can reveal a range of virtues [Damon of Ath.]
     Full Idea: In singing and playing the lyre, a boy will be likely to reveal not only courage and moderation, but also justice.
     From: Damon (fragments/reports [c.460 BCE], B4), quoted by (who?) - where?
25. Social Practice / F. Life Issues / 3. Abortion
The right to life is not a right not to be killed, but not to be killed unjustly [Thomson]
     Full Idea: Maybe the right to life consists not in the right not to be killed, but in the right not to be killed unjustly.
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.131)
     A reaction: Sounds tautological. There is no right to life, then, but just the requirement that people behave justly?
The right to life does not bestow the right to use someone else's body to support that life [Thomson]
     Full Idea: Having a right to life does not guarantee having either a right to be given the use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another person's body.
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.131)
     A reaction: A very nice point. You have a right to your life once you are the sole owner of it.
No one is morally required to make huge sacrifices to keep someone else alive for nine months [Thomson]
     Full Idea: No one is morally required to make large sacrifices, of health, and other interests and commitments, for nine months, in order to keep another person alive.
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.135)
     A reaction: It is a trade-off. It might become a duty if society (or even a husband) urgently needed the baby.
Maybe abortion can be justified despite the foetus having full human rights [Thomson, by Foot]
     Full Idea: Thomson suggests that abortion can be justified without the need to deny that the foetus has the moral rights of a human person.
     From: report of Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971]) by Philippa Foot - Killing and Letting Die p.86
     A reaction: Thomson uses a dubious analogy between pregnancy and being hooked up to someone for life-support. Presumably killing an innocent person is occasionally justifiable, but the situation would normally be more abnormal than pregnancy.
The foetus is safe in the womb, so abortion initiates its death, with the mother as the agent. [Foot on Thomson]
     Full Idea: A fetus is not in jeopardy because it is in the womb, so an abortion originates the fatal sequence, and the mother is the agent. Hence Thomson's argument is invalid, and we must return to question of the moral status of the foetus.
     From: comment on Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971]) by Philippa Foot - Killing and Letting Die p.86
     A reaction: The problem would be if a 'person' was safe, but only if I continue some sustained effort which is not required of me by normal duties.
A newly fertilized ovum is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree [Thomson]
     Full Idea: A newly fertilized ovum, a newly implanted clump of cells, is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree.
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.125)
     A reaction: This relies heavily on the philosopher's concept of a 'person', but it seems right to me.
Is someone's right to life diminished if they were conceived by a rape? [Thomson]
     Full Idea: Can we say that a person has a right to life only if they didn't come into existence through rape, or that the latter have less right to life?
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.126)
     A reaction: This would clearly be an inconsistency for some opponents of abortion who allow rape as an exception.
It can't be murder for a mother to perform an abortion on herself to save her own life [Thomson]
     Full Idea: It cannot seriously be thought to be murder if a mother performs an abortion on herself to save her own life (if, say, she had a serious heart condition).
     From: Judith (Jarvis) Thomson (A Defense of Abortion [1971], p.127)
     A reaction: An extreme view might condemn such an action, but it can hardly be based on the 'sanctity of life'.
26. Natural Theory / C. Causation / 9. General Causation / a. Constant conjunction
We all know that mere priority or constant conjunction do not have to imply causation [Reid]
     Full Idea: Every man who understands the language knows that neither priority, nor constant conjunction, nor both taken together, imply efficiency.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 2)
     A reaction: This invites the question of how we do know causal events, if none of our experiences are enough to prove it. Reid says we have an innate knowledge that all events are caused, but that isn't much help. The presence of power?
26. Natural Theory / D. Laws of Nature / 1. Laws of Nature
The principle of the law of nature is that matter is passive, and is acted upon [Reid]
     Full Idea: The law of nature respecting matter is grounded upon this principle: That matter is an inert, inactive substance, which does not act, but is acted upon.
     From: Thomas Reid (Essays on Active Powers 4: Liberty of Agents [1788], 5)
     A reaction: A clear statement (alongside Euler's) of the 18th century view, still with us, but strikes me as entirely wrong. Their view needs the active power of God to drive the laws. Matter has intrinsic primitive powers, and laws describe patterns of behaviour.