Philosophical Argument Essay Example for Free

Philosophical Argument Essay â€Å"Something must first be said briefly about the moral subjectivism inherent in this analysis. Based on the above, it follows that some things could be immoral for some people and moral (or amoral) for others, since people vary in their values. For example, some people may possess a fundamental value for all animal life of any kind, which would entail not eating meat, not allowing suicide, nor even allowing the removal of life support for a brain-dead patient. But this value system would only exist for them, not for others. However, my analysis does not entail moral relativism in the usual sense, since it is also possible (and I believe it is the case) that some fundamental values are shared by all people, or very nearly all people (I allow some rare exceptions for the sociopath, who is generally regarded as having a mind alien to the vast majority of humankind, devoid of all ordinary moral sentiment). (Carrier)†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The above argument contains two premises: 1) Some people value all forms of life; and 2) All people share some fundamental values. The conclusion is that: Morality is relative. The quoted passage is an example of argument because it expresses a claim which is being supported by the given premises. It can be said that morality is relative because people have different perspective about the value of life – (that while others do not admit any sort of action that would not promote life as morally permissible, others welcome the fact that every person has a right to make a decision about how he would like to treat his life or whatsoever). â€Å"From a point of view outside of this affair, the killing of a neurologically inactive fetus is no greater a harm than the killing of a mouse, and in fact decidedly lessa mouse is neurologically active, and though it lacks a complex cerebral cortex, it has a brain of suitable complexity to perceive pain (and I would argue that the mouse deserves some moral consideration, though less than humans). A fetus cannot perceive pain (and perception is not quite the same thing as sensation: sensation can exist without a brain, but perception cannot). The neural structures necessary to register and record sensations of pain transmitted by the appropriate nerves either do not exist or are not functioning before the fifth month of gestation. A fetus can no more feel pain than a surgical patient under general anasthesia, or a paraplegic whose lower-body nerves continue reacting to stimuli, but cease sending signals to the brain. And we have already established that a fetus does not contain an individual human personality of any kind, any more than a brain-dead adult does. With no perception of pain, and no loss of an individual personality, the act of abortion causes no immediate harm. (Carrier†   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   The second passage is another example of an argument. It has three premises; 1) Fetus is neurologically inactive; 2) Fetus does not feel pain; 3) Fetus does not possess individual personality. The conclusion suggests that: Abortion causes no harm. Obviously, the established premises attempt to prove the conclusion. Since fetus cannot react to any form of stimuli as how a surgical patient or even a mouse does, hence the act of abortion does not inflict harm to the fetus. Work Cited Carrier, Richard C. Abortion is not Immoral and Should not be Illegal . 30 November 2005.  Ã‚   Internet Infidels. 31 February 2008  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/debates/secularist/abortion/carrier1.html.