|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 05/26/2004 : 13:58:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
What do you think of the definitions in my initial post?
From an subjective critical view, I would say that in order for something to be considered alive you have to include some creteria concerning independent viability in the definition. Brainwaves and heartbeat are evidence only of systems functioning within an organism, not of life. And brainwaves can be detected in individuals who are considered to be clinically "braindead". The character of brainwaves it what is used to determine their meaning, not their presence or abscence.
Here is a very general definition of life provided by www.dictionary.com
quote:
The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism.
I would submit that at either 18 or 42 days after conception only two of these functions (metabolism and growth) are present. And while this may suffice when determining the life state of something like a single celled organism, it falls short of describing what I would say constitutes human life... which is the definition we are seeking here, I think. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 14:01:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Okay then, lets go with the 35% number worldwide. I trust your doctor. This translates into many people that should have the chance at life.
It does? I am not following your line of reasoning with that statement. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 14:50:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
From an subjective critical view, I would say that in order for something to be considered alive you have to include some creteria concerning independent viability in the definition.
I agree. I will submit that an embryo is an independant life from the mother. The baby has a seperate brain, hands, heart etc. that the mother cannot use for herself. The mother is only supplying the neccesities needed to sustain life. Just as my wife suypplied food for our children through nursing.
quote:
Brainwaves and heartbeat are evidence only of systems functioning within an organism, not of life. And brainwaves can be detected in individuals who are considered to be clinically "braindead". The character of brainwaves it what is used to determine their meaning, not their presence or abscence.
How do you detect the character of brain waves? I would say that if the brain is functioning life exists.
quote:
Here is a very general definition of life provided by www.dictionary.com
The property or quality that distinguishes living organisms from dead organisms and inanimate matter, manifested in functions such as metabolism, growth, reproduction, and response to stimuli or adaptation to the environment originating from within the organism.
I would submit that at either 18 or 42 days after conception only two of these functions (metabolism and growth) are present. And while this may suffice when determining the life state of something like a single celled organism, it falls short of describing what I would say constitutes human life... which is the definition we are seeking here, I think.
I believe it falls short also. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 14:57:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
How do you detect the character of brain waves? I would say that if the brain is functioning life exists.
With an electro encephalogram (EEG).
A neurologist then interprets the measurements made.
Clinically braindead people have brainwaves...
The presence or abscence of brainwaves (in and of itself) is not a reasonable criteria to determine life. Any neuroligist will tell you they also use other diagnostic tools and assessment to determine brain function. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 15:02:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
Okay then, lets go with the 35% number worldwide. I trust your doctor. This translates into many people that should have the chance at life.
It does? I am not following your line of reasoning with that statement.
Oops! I did not put the quote from Dave I was answering. quote:
I would like to see some support for your contention that at the moment of conception, there is an 80% chance of live birth. My wife's OB/GYN told us the odds were more like 35%, and Discover said something else (I'm in the process of moving, and many things - like that recent issue - are packed).
I still do not like this number it seams low to me. I will look for some data tonight. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 16:10:52 [Permalink]
|
The number of fertalized eggs that make it to full term births is a low number. I don't recall the exact statistics, but I'm sure that your research will demonstrate this.
Also, the US will give you the highest %, and that's likely what any real research you dig up will point to... the % chance of a full term birth in the US. Other places, where medical infrastructure is less advanced or even non-existant, the numbers will go down drastically from what you can expect to find in the US. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26031 Posts |
Posted - 05/26/2004 : 18:18:45 [Permalink]
|
Robb wrote:quote:
Yes it does, but it does not go far enough. Thinking, reasoning and emotions are all a part of human life that cannot be removed. As far as I know, plants and sperm do not have the capacity to have these qualities.
Those qualities cannot be removed, but they are not binary, "on/off," qualities. They are a matter of degree. Certainly many other animals think. Apes, dolphins, ravens, and other creatures show capacity to reason. And if you've never seen a puppy dog look at you with "puppy dog eyes" after it's been scolded, I can understand why you discount the possibilities that other animals show emotion.
Plants and sperm are obviously far removed from these considerations, but thinking, reasoning and emotion are not unique to humans, it's just that humans appear to be equipped with more of all three than any other creature.
On the other hand, if you'd like to base a definition of "human life" upon them, then I assert that until after one is born, one can demonstrate none of these attributes, and so is not alive.quote:
They are both life but human life should be defined by different criteria. Refer to previous answer.
My problem with holding human life to different standards, in a scientific (as contrasted with legal) sense is that those standards will necessarily be based upon emotional considerations, like "I don't want to be thought of as a hairless ape, so humans are 'better'" (for just one example among many possibilities).quote:
Killing certain fish is not illegal. Certain humans are Ok to kill (Soldiers, Death Row inmates, etc.) but only with reason. I can yank any fish out of the water and kill it without any justification as long as it is not endangered.
And in certain places on the Earth, one can kill any human one likes, without justification. Again, you are basing your definition upon matters of law, and not science.quote:
[I wrote:]quote:
From a purely biological viewpoint, there's no reason to hold Homo sapiens sapiens to a different standard than any other creature in the universe.
I disagree. Refer to previous answers.
Unfortunately, your previous answers appear to neglect the "purely biological viewpoint" phrase within my earlier words. Yes, biology is responsible for making us the most thoughtful, reasonable and emotional animals on the planet, but those things only matter as far as far as how much they help us individuals reproduce. A high IQ is meaningless towards a definition of life if its possessor doesn't aid the reproduction of his/her own genes.quote:
Okay then, lets go with the 35% number worldwide. I trust your doctor. This translates into many people that should have the chance at life.
I prefer we back up and attempt to come to an agreement on a definition of life, first, before trying to figure out when that life begins, or -- bringing the abortion aspect back into things -- who "should have the chance" for life.
If you'd like, we can attempt to agree on just a definition of human life, but I fear it will be inadequate in some way to limit the definition so much. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2004 : 00:10:58 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Plants and sperm are obviously far removed from these considerations, but thinking, reasoning and emotion are not unique to humans, it's just that humans appear to be equipped with more of all three than any other creature.
If there is one thing that sets humans apart from other forms of life it's this: We are the only creatures on this planet capable of examining and critically thinking about our existance.
But yes, I agree with Dave.... we need to agree upon a definition for life before this can continue in a meaningfull way. I'd also agree that a complete definition of human life may be impossible to agree upon and inadequate.
A place to start: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oi=defmore&q=define:life
And so you know, this is one of those HARD questions. It's one that people everywhere are struggling with.
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/life's_working_definition.html
http://baharna.com/philos/life.htm
It's also a question that has troubled the minds of philosophers for thousands of years.... so don't feel to bad if we don't come up with an answer today. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2004 : 05:27:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
But yes, I agree with Dave.... we need to agree upon a definition for life before this can continue in a meaningfull way. I'd also agree that a complete definition of human life may be impossible to agree upon and inadequate.
I agree.
I think we need to first find a definition that fits all life, then modify or add to it to fit human life. Dave's definition was;
quote:
One definition of 'life' is that which takes in energy, produces waste, and has the potential for self-replication (either with a partner or not).
I think this definition describes all life, does anybody agree or disagree?
quote:
It's also a question that has troubled the minds of philosophers for thousands of years.... so don't feel to bad if we don't come up with an answer today.
Man, I need an answer by tomorrow! |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 05/27/2004 : 06:15:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
And human life fits the definition I supplied. We eat, excrete, and procreate.
Yes it does, but it does not go far enough. Thinking, reasoning and emotions are all a part of human life that cannot be removed. As far as I know, plants and sperm do not have the capacity to have these qualities.
The EEG's of first trimester and part of second trimester fetuses do not show the brain wave intensity which coincides with thinking or reasoning. Neither do clinically brain dead people. Under your definition, these cannot be considered human life. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9696 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2004 : 04:32:06 [Permalink]
|
What I have seen thus far are several attempts to use definitions of life that is meant to be applied to an organism's entire life-cycle, applied to a very short period in the beginning of the organism's life.
Just like bacteria are alive, so is a zygote.
The sperm is using metabolism to accomplish a pre-defined goal (procreation), and reacts to stimuli on it's way.
As for a biological definition of life in regards to human procreation, life if always present, just different.
Life branch off from the man, and from the woman. These two specks of life fuse to one speck of life that grows into a new person. In my eyes, life is continuity.
You can't force fit biological definitions of life onto a zygote or an embryo, and use it to define legal definitions for protecting human life. I realise how tempting is it to try to convince skeptic pro-abortionists that they are immoral, because they propose killing human beings. But it won't work. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2004 : 20:47:43 [Permalink]
|
I think that people everywhere could agree upon a biological definition of life.
It's the philosophical definition that gets difficult, and this is the definition that we will ultimately base our ethics and laws from, not the biological definition.
As with many matters of philosophy, it will probably be impossible to come up with a definition that would be accepted by a large majority. |
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
