Skill 3 Part 1: Explication of Marquis’ future of value principle In my essay, I will explain why Marquis thinks that the future of value principle provides a compelling view regarding the impermissibility of killing humans of all ages, aliens and fetuses. Then, I will explain why Marquis and McPhersan believe that the future of value principle applies to fetuses and animals respectively and that I agree with both of them. Finally, I will defend my argument against the future of value principle since I believe the principle is not adequate to explain the impermissibility of killing. I will use termination and killing synonymously in my essay. He defines a future of value as “ the loss … of all those activities, projects, experiences, and enjoyments… [constituting] my future personal life.” (Marquis, pg.4) Here is Marquis’ future of value principle as shown below: Premise 1: For all beings with a future of value, then killing them is considered impermissible (Marquis, pg.4). Premise 2: Fetuses have a future of value as well (Marquis, pg.7). Conclusion: Therefore, terminating a fetus through abortion is impermissible (Marquis, pg.7). Marquis defends Premise 1 by providing a couple of examples. Part 2: Does the future of value …show more content…
Marquis only justified that killing via euthanasia is only permissible on “[people] who are severely and incurably ill” and “who face a future of pain and despair” if they “wish to die” because they “will not have suffered a loss if they are killed” (Marquis, pg.6). However, Premise 1 does not explicitly state that it is impermissible to kill beings without a future of value at all but still have the will to live. Thus, the above scenario strengthens my argument by counterexample and disproves premise 1 of the future of value principle