Philosophy and Abortion

I'm currently taking philosophy, which is an excellent class. We've been spending the last few weeks discussing the ethical issues around what it means to be a person, specifically at issues of abortion, cloning and embryo research. This is one of my weekly reflections on our reading:

Our reading this week was about abortion. In addition to being an incredibly difficult social issue, abortion seems like an extremely powerful topic for exploring the value and impact of philosophy. Abortion brings up a number of issues that humanity has perpetually struggled with. What is a person? What rights do people have? What happens when the rights of individuals clash? What is our responsibility to others? What is the ethical course of action? What is the role of society in resolving disagreements around moral issues?

Obviously, it is unlikely that we will come up with any definitive resolution to any of these questions. But even if we can’t find the “right” answer to these questions, as a society we still have to deal with the difficult issues (like abortion) that they impact. Even if there is uncertainty about what is right or wrong, something has to be done (especially in the case of abortion, choosing inaction still counts as a choice).

It is interesting to compare our readings, and their attempt to make a case for or against abortion, to the public debate that often surrounds the issue. In the media and elsewhere the abortion debate is often heated, hyper-emotional, and visceral. It inflames feelings and passions, for and against, that seem very distant from the carefully thought out reasoning of the articles we read. The poem by Susan Tracy and the piece by Alice Walker come closest to capturing the emotional impact of the issue.

That dichotomy, between emotion and reasoning especially struck me during the reading this week. From one point of view, the pieces by Thomson and Callahan seemed somewhat unreal, even naive. Their reasoning, unemotional and abstract, seemed distant from what I think of as the painful and emotionally complex issue of abortion. While I appreciated the writing and reasoning of both, they seemed to minimize the fundamentally human experiences at the center of the debate. An abortion is an incredibly personal experience with irrevocable consequences. Their arguments, while well presented, seemed limited because they failed to really capture the true, lived experience of abortion.

From another point of view, however, their reasoning is what we need when confronting such difficult issues. When confronted with controversies that evoke incredibly strong, often unreasoned emotional responses, it is easy for thoughtful analysis and discussion to be lost, to be overwhelmed by the intensity of feelings on both sides.

Coming into our class, I think this tension between reason and emotion was something I often equated with philosophy. What is the role of reason? Although intellect and analysis is essential, what do you lose by neglecting lived, emotional experiences? At the same time, it is easy to see the potential negative consequences of an over-reliance on emotion. Trying to balance reason and emotion is a perennial challenge when we wrestle with difficult issues.

With this in mind, I really appreciate the selection of our readings. The pieces by Walker and Tracy are embedded in powerful,concrete human experiences, and evoke strong emotional responses. The pieces by Thomson and Callahan are more analytical, approaching the issue with careful thought and reasoning. Reading the pieces together provides a rounded, powerful treatment of the issue, balancing real emotion and careful thought.

Of course, that is still unlikely to resolve the issue! But trying to offer a balanced treatment, looking at not only the for and against of the issue, but also the emotional and analytical treatment of it, offers us a more powerful and meaningful pathway for understanding the challenges involved.