Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   When does human life begin?
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1271 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(2)
Message 271 of 327 (650794)
02-02-2012 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by shadow71
02-01-2012 11:53 AM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
You still have the issue of Intact dilation and extraction or partial birth abortion at 9 months.
Intact dilation and extraction is performed between 19 and 26 weeks, which is the end of the second trimester.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by shadow71, posted 02-01-2012 11:53 AM shadow71 has seen this message but not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(3)
Message 272 of 327 (650796)
02-02-2012 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 270 by Meddle
02-02-2012 9:07 PM


Let's simplify it.
Malcolm writes:
I'm really not sure, but I suppose it's easy to point to that first diploid cell with human DNA and say there is something that fills the basic criteria for life and it's human.
Sure we could call it human life. It's the human life cycle, so everything involved can be called that, including the egg and sperm. And if she wants to call the zygote a human organism, that's fine by me. So, we could look at her argument in these two ways:
Firstly, the zygote (B) and a person (C) are both human organisms (A)s. So, a zygote is a person because if both B and C are an A, then B=C.
Spot the fallacy!
Secondly, because a (B) can potentially become a (C), then B=C.
Just as bad!
I may be being unfair because I haven't gone back to look at the paper, but from memory, the above seems to be a simplified version of what she wants to say.
I can remember noticing that "human organism i.e. human being" bit at the beginning with suspicion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by Meddle, posted 02-02-2012 9:07 PM Meddle has seen this message but not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 273 of 327 (650945)
02-03-2012 3:07 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by Straggler
02-01-2012 12:11 PM


Re: Occupy Reality - We Are The 40 Percent.....
Staggler writes:
Occupy Reality - We Are The 40 Percent.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If 60 percent of human souls ends up in a better place as part of God’s will without ever having physically existed as anything more than a few cells or having any comprehension of physical existence one has to wonder what the point of the other 40 percent of us is.
I am the 40%.....
Good question.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Straggler, posted 02-01-2012 12:11 PM Straggler has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 274 of 327 (650954)
02-03-2012 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by Perdition
02-01-2012 12:38 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
Perdition writes:
But while the fetus is dependent on the mother for survival, it would seem to fail this part of the definition, would it not.
Not to mention, until differentiation, there are no different organs, again failing this part.
At best, it would seem that the fetus is a part of the mother, meaning she can have it removed, if she wants.
She cites that definiton to support the position distinguishing a zygot, a human being, from a collection of cells types that are alive but perform certain functions but are not organisms because they do not perform coordinated interactions directed towards any higher level of organization, as the zygote does that continues until death.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by Perdition, posted 02-01-2012 12:38 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by Perdition, posted 02-03-2012 3:36 PM shadow71 has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 275 of 327 (650956)
02-03-2012 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 242 by hooah212002
02-01-2012 8:09 PM


Re: Previous thread/s
hooah writes:
What's juvenile about pointing out your absurd notion of "praying" for a single cell? I think your "praying" is the absurd bit. Perhaps even more absurd is thinking you'll acknowledge how ridiculous you sound saying you pray for zygotes and hope they are "in a better place".
If they are in fact human beings may I pray for them?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by hooah212002, posted 02-01-2012 8:09 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by hooah212002, posted 02-03-2012 4:09 PM shadow71 has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 276 of 327 (650957)
02-03-2012 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 243 by bluegenes
02-01-2012 8:12 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
bluegenes writes:
So: Do you consider yourself to be a corpse right now on the basis that your biology determines that that will be the case in the future? Yes or no?
A corpse is not a human being, so no I do not consider myself to be a corpse.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 243 by bluegenes, posted 02-01-2012 8:12 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by bluegenes, posted 02-03-2012 5:41 PM shadow71 has replied

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 3238 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


(1)
Message 277 of 327 (650959)
02-03-2012 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by shadow71
02-03-2012 3:26 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
perform coordinated interactions directed towards any higher level of organization, as the zygote does that continues until death.
What is the difference between a single-celled blastocyst and a stem cell in my bone marrow? Both are single cells, both can create multiple different cells that are necessary for "higher organization."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by shadow71, posted 02-03-2012 3:26 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by shadow71, posted 02-06-2012 2:06 PM Perdition has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 278 of 327 (650961)
02-03-2012 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 244 by Meddle
02-01-2012 9:27 PM


She cites that definiton to support the posiRe: So what was the point of this thread?
Malcolm writes:
Well as I said it does contain human DNA, so ultimately over many generations these local interactions will lay down the tissues that can be collectively called a human. The point I was trying to make was that these interactions are not significantly different from the interactions in the cells of an adult in maintaining the human body which has developed, such as the germinal layer of the epidermis giving rise to new skin cells, or haematopoietic stem cells multiplying to produce the various blood cells.
She cites that definiton to support the position distinguishing a zygot, a human being, from a collection of cells types that are alive but perform certain functions but are not organisms because they do not perform coordinated interactions directed towards any higher level of organization, as the zygote does that continues until death. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 244 by Meddle, posted 02-01-2012 9:27 PM Meddle has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 279 of 327 (650964)
02-03-2012 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Meddle
01-31-2012 6:17 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
Malcolm writes:
Finally I'll leave you with this scenario to consider. A woman is pregnant with a child when she is diagnosed with cancer. Due to the nature of chemotherapeutic drugs it is most likely that the foetus will die, but carrying it to term will be too late for the cancer to be effectively treated. In your view who is more important in this scenario, who makes the decisions?
If the fetus is not able to be taken by C-Section then If the mother wishes to be treated she should be treated. She is not intentionally destroying the fetus and there is also the chance if she is not treated she may not live to deliver the baby. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Meddle, posted 01-31-2012 6:17 PM Meddle has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 802 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 280 of 327 (650966)
02-03-2012 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 275 by shadow71
02-03-2012 3:32 PM


Re: Previous thread/s
Go back and read bluegenes Message 235 because that image is the answer to your implied question. To answer your direct question: you are free to "pray" for whatever you want. I am just pointing out that it is a futile and deceiptful effort given that a zygote is not a human being but rather a single cell.

Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell

This message is a reply to:
 Message 275 by shadow71, posted 02-03-2012 3:32 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by shadow71, posted 02-04-2012 3:36 PM hooah212002 has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(2)
Message 281 of 327 (650987)
02-03-2012 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by shadow71
02-03-2012 3:36 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
shadow71 writes:
A corpse is not a human being, so no I do not consider myself to be a corpse.
Good. So, we can agree that because something is in the process of transforming into something else, it is not that something else until the transformation has taken place. And that applies when the transformation is inevitable.
So why, when the (far from inevitable) transformation of a zygote into a newborn baby has not taken place, should we regard a mindless single cell as a person?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by shadow71, posted 02-03-2012 3:36 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by shadow71, posted 02-04-2012 3:30 PM bluegenes has not replied
 Message 283 by shadow71, posted 02-04-2012 3:32 PM bluegenes has replied
 Message 296 by bluegenes, posted 02-06-2012 4:10 AM bluegenes has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 282 of 327 (651122)
02-04-2012 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by bluegenes
02-03-2012 5:41 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
bluegenes writes:
Good. So, we can agree that because something is in the process of transforming into something else, it is not that something else until the transformation has taken place. And that applies when the transformation is inevitable
A corpse is not a human being. It has ceased to be. So the analogy is not revelant.
The human being is transformed into different stages with labels such as zygot, child, adult ect. but it is still the same organism. So no we don't agree on that.
bluegenes from previous message writes:
Something can't become what it already is. Presumably you mean at what stage in the human life cycle does a human being emerge. Scientifically, there's no consensus, and it's very difficult to see how there could be one. IMO, we don't have a very good definition of what we are. If we can't rigorously define a "person" and list all the attributes it should have, then how can we decide on a precise time in the cycle? Some of the most important things, like our conscious awareness of the world, don't actually seem to be there in new born babies, who act very much instinctively. But the person seems to start to emerge during the first few months.
So, the closest I can say as a tentative personal suggestion is during the first few months after birth. But wherever we fix it, it's rather arbitrary.
I have a question in re your personal view as to when a human being emerges.
How does that viewpoint affect when you believe an abortion can be performed morally, not legally?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by bluegenes, posted 02-03-2012 5:41 PM bluegenes has not replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 283 of 327 (651123)
02-04-2012 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 281 by bluegenes
02-03-2012 5:41 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
bluegenes writes:
Good. So, we can agree that because something is in the process of transforming into something else, it is not that something else until the transformation has taken place. And that applies when the transformation is inevitable
A corpse is not a human being. It has ceased to be. So the analogy is not revelant.
The human being is transformed into different stages with laels such as zygot, child, adult ect. but it is still the same organism. So no we don't agree on that.
bluegenes from previous message writes:
Something can't become what it already is. Presumably you mean at what stage in the human life cycle does a human being emerge. Scientifically, there's no consensus, and it's very difficult to see how there could be one. IMO, we don't have a very good definition of what we are. If we can't rigorously define a "person" and list all the attributes it should have, then how can we decide on a precise time in the cycle? Some of the most important things, like our conscious awareness of the world, don't actually seem to be there in new born babies, who act very much instinctively. But the person seems to start to emerge during the first few months.
So, the closest I can say as a tentative personal suggestion is during the first few months after birth. But wherever we fix it, it's rather arbitrary.
I have a question in re your personal view as to when a human being emerges.
How does that viewpoint affect when you believe an abortion can be performed morally, not legally?
Sorry I somehow posted it twice.
Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.
Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by bluegenes, posted 02-03-2012 5:41 PM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by bluegenes, posted 02-04-2012 4:08 PM shadow71 has replied

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 2934 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 284 of 327 (651125)
02-04-2012 3:36 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by hooah212002
02-03-2012 4:09 PM


Re: Previous thread/s
hooah writes:
you are free to "pray" for whatever you want. I am just pointing out that it is a futile and deceiptful effort given that a zygote is not a human being but rather a single cell.
I guess we have to agree to disagree on that point. But why is it deceiptful?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by hooah212002, posted 02-03-2012 4:09 PM hooah212002 has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2478 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 285 of 327 (651127)
02-04-2012 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by shadow71
02-04-2012 3:32 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
shadow71 writes:
A corpse is not a human being. It has ceased to be. So the analogy is not revelant.
The person ceases to exist, but the corpse exists at the moment of death. One is not the other.
shadow writes:
The human being is transformed into different stages with laels such as zygot, child, adult ect. but it is still the same organism. So no we don't agree on that.
The human life cycle goes through these stages, yes. But you sound as though you've now found a definition of human being that includes the phrase "single cell".
shadow71 writes:
I have a question in re your personal view as to when a human being emerges.
How does that viewpoint affect when you believe an abortion can be performed morally, not legally?
I'd say very broadly speaking that we should try to avoid killing sentient people. That is persons with personalities. I don't think abortions can technically be performed on such things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by shadow71, posted 02-04-2012 3:32 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by shadow71, posted 02-05-2012 10:56 AM bluegenes has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024