Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


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


(1)
Message 223 of 327 (650535)
01-31-2012 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by shadow71
01-29-2012 2:43 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
bluegenes writes:
Her conclusion doesn't follow from her technical description.
That is your opinion and she obviously disagrees with you. I don't know your qualifications, but do know she is a qualified biologist. If you are also qualfied to give that opinion then there is disagreement.
Well look at how she describes an organism down on page 6 of the document. She takes a perfectly reasonable dictionary definition as (1) a complex structure of interdependent and subordinate elements whose relations and properties are largely determined by their function in the whole and (2) an individual constituted to carry on the activities of life by means of organs separate in function but mutually dependent: a living being. However she then tries to argue that the DNA, RNA, organelles et al. we see in a fertilised egg are the equivalent of organs we see in a developed human body when they clearly are not. There is very little to differentiate between the structures in a fertilised egg and that of a skin cell, for example. The only difference is in the way the genes in those cells are expressed, but here again she tries to equivocate by suggesting that the cells in the developing embryo are working towards some grand plan to produce a mature human body. But what is really happening is as the cells multiply they interact with their neighbours, causing variation in their gene expression and altering the trajectory of their daughter cells into gradually more specific tissue types. It just so happens that these local interactions lead to an adult human.
But despite the spin the basic science is fairly sound and reminds you that a human life is greater than the sum of it's parts i.e. a collection of cells which happen to carry human DNA. It's when those collections of cells develop to the point where distinct tissues form, allowing the developing foetus to react to external stimuli, with the potential to learn and feel, and internally by maintaining some degree of homeostasis, that we can start to consider it an individual human life.
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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by shadow71, posted 01-29-2012 2:43 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by bluegenes, posted 02-01-2012 9:36 AM Meddle has replied
 Message 234 by shadow71, posted 02-01-2012 12:43 PM Meddle has replied
 Message 279 by shadow71, posted 02-03-2012 3:51 PM Meddle has not replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1271 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(1)
Message 244 of 327 (650678)
02-01-2012 9:27 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by shadow71
02-01-2012 12:43 PM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
Have you ever seen a zygote as defined in her paper develop into any organism except a human being?
So I don't agree that "It just so happens that these local interactions lead to an adult human."
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.
I would be interested in your views on the scenario I submitted concerning a pregnant woman being diagnosed with cancer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by shadow71, posted 02-01-2012 12:43 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by shadow71, posted 02-03-2012 3:42 PM Meddle has not replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1271 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(1)
Message 270 of 327 (650792)
02-02-2012 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by bluegenes
02-01-2012 9:36 AM


Re: So what was the point of this thread?
Did you notice that the article asks the question "when does human life begin"? Human life, human organism, and human being end up being treated as one and the same, and (from memory) at one point she says "human organism i.e. human being" before she's even made her argument. Although any organism can certainly be a "being" in some senses of the word, so can anything that exists (including human eggs and sperm). But when the phrase "human being" is used, it's usually understood to mean a person.
Yes I did notice the terms being used as if they were synonymous and as you say she did state "human organism i.e. human being" in her summary, which she placed at the beginning before any arguments. As I said I would describe a human being as an organism based on the definition she chose to use, I just had a problem with her trying to draw parallels between the tissues and organs of a developed human, and the chemical reactions of those initial precursor cells.
Of course I say this, but I do work in a microbiology lab where I regularly refer to bacteria as organisms. However these single-celled organisms have reached the highest level of complexity they are going to attain, whereas a zygote is still on the first step of a long journey to the level of complexity we would refer to as a human being.
Religious "pro-life" groups are remarkably fond of phrasing the question "when does an individual human person begin" as "when does human life begin"? Why?
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. It also lends well to this tendency to describe every point in development as a 'baby' which is certainly emotive language.
It makes me think of that old 17th century idea of the homunculus i.e. the zygote, or even before, is a fully formed human, gestation just allows it to grow bigger. Some of this rhetoric can be seen in the article with the idea of the zygote working towards developing a complete human body. Also the analogy of the car manufacturing with the embryo differing because it constructs itself without outside help, which is wrong since it is working to the 'instruction set' obtained from the sperm and egg of it's parents.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by bluegenes, posted 02-01-2012 9:36 AM bluegenes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by bluegenes, posted 02-02-2012 10:23 PM Meddle has seen this message but not replied

  
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

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024