U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-21-2018, 02:19 PM
 
27 posts, read 2,875 times
Reputation: 43

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post
Human and person do not mean the same thing. Just as humanity and personality do not mean the same thing. Personhood can be applied to any living entity that demonstrates what its personality is, regardless of its nature and its species.

A human being becomes a human being at conception, but is not yet a person. The human being achieves personhood after it is born into the world. Only after birth has occurred is it able to begin to develop and demonstrate its personhood and its personality. The development of personality is dictated and influenced by both worldly and celestial forces outside of the womb.

.


In the dictionary personhood is defined as:

  1. the state or fact of being a person.
  1. the state or fact of being an individual or having human characteristics and feelings:
Babies display human characteristics and feelings months before they're actually born
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-21-2018, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Maryland
1,025 posts, read 304,221 times
Reputation: 2302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
I do agree with you on this, that's the question "What constitutes life?" From what I do know, when the egg and the sperm combine to create the zygote something remarkable happens, and I call this life. Now this zygote has only one purpose, to become a human being, it will not become birch tree nor will it become a frog, dog or anything else, it will be a human being. This is just the beginning of its journey, and that journey is racked with perils if it overcomes these perils it will, after 9 months, emerge as, what we call, an infant.
I disagree with one part of this. Life isn’t created de novo when an egg and sperm unite. There has to have been life before that; the sperm is alive, the egg is alive. Not only that, it is human life, carrying the unique genome of a single individual. If one of them is not alive, you get nothing on their union. Life is a continuum, it doesn’t just abruptly appear at fertilization. I only mention this because this seems to be a common refrain that “life begins.....” at some particular point. It began only once, as far as we know, millennia ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Maryland
1,025 posts, read 304,221 times
Reputation: 2302
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixlets82 View Post
If a human being is declared legally dead when the heart stops beating then logically wouldn't life begin when the heart starts beating?
Do not confuse “life” with the legal protections of personhood. This is what I was talking about in my immediately prior post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 02:38 PM
 
Location: Maryland
1,025 posts, read 304,221 times
Reputation: 2302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Joshua View Post
Just exactly how do you think you started out?
I’m a retired biologist. I know how I started out. Since I don’t know you or what you know, I was curious about the basis of your statement since you said it was based on science. No need to be snide unless I’ve misunderstood the tone of your statement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 02:55 PM
 
Location: S.W. British Columbia
6,302 posts, read 5,979,981 times
Reputation: 11276
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixlets82 View Post
In the dictionary personhood is defined as:

  1. the state or fact of being a person.
  1. the state or fact of being an individual or having human characteristics and feelings:
Babies display human characteristics and feelings months before they're actually born

Your dictionary defines a person as a human being distinguished from an animal or a thing but there are other dictionaries, even other cultures and other sources with definitions that say otherwise. I prefer to look at the whole and form my own conclusions about what personhood and person actually is based on the whole combined with my own experience and observation.

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person

"A person is a being that has certain capacities or attributes such as reason, morality, consciousness or self-consciousness, and being a part of a culturally established form of social relations such as kinship, ownership of property, or legal responsibility.The defining features of personhood and consequently what makes a person count as a person differ widely among cultures and contexts.

In addition to the question of personhood, of what makes a being count as a person to begin with, there are further questions about personal identity and self: both about what makes any particular person that particular person instead of another, and about what makes a person at one time the same person as they were or will be at another time despite any intervening changes. ....."

Contents

I'll stick with what I have found to be true and what I believe in.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 03:17 PM
 
Location: Southwest Washington State
19,592 posts, read 12,928,330 times
Reputation: 25781
Quote:
Originally Posted by timberline742 View Post
Yes, this. So obvious.


Sure, cells/sperm/eggs/fertilized carry the code, the code for being a human being, but they are not a person.
I might agree that an unborn child is not a person (I might agree) but the unborn is a human, a Homo sapiens.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 03:26 PM
 
27 posts, read 2,875 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesLucid View Post
Do not confuse “life” with the legal protections of personhood. This is what I was talking about in my immediately prior post.

Yes, I already addressed this. The bigger question, is it not a dangerous concept to link personhood to levels of functionality?? If this were the case could we then declare handicapped people, children and the elderly as non-persons because of lower levels of functionality??


"What is crucial morally is the being of a person, not his or her functioning. A human person does not come into existence when human function arises, but rather, a human person is an entity who has the natural inherent capacity to give rise to human functions, whether or not those functions are ever attained. …A human person who lacks the ability to think rationally (either because she is too young or she suffers from a disability) is still a human person because of her nature. Consequently, it makes sense to speak of a human being’s lack if and only if she is an actual person." -American Philosopher Francis J. Beckwith
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
11,145 posts, read 7,874,324 times
Reputation: 5416
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesLucid View Post
I’m a retired biologist. I know how I started out. Since I don’t know you or what you know, I was curious about the basis of your statement since you said it was based on science. No need to be snide unless I’ve misunderstood the tone of your statement.
Sorry Les, boy you really are lucid, it’s not a common trait on this board so I misunderstood your tone. My belief of when a life begins is exactly when you said, when the cell has the chromosomes of both parents. It is the beginning of a human life. It’s where we all as individuals began. What bothers me is all the arbitrary milestones people choose as their answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 06:17 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,409 posts, read 13,506,041 times
Reputation: 14351
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
In this piece, he categorically states that a human life becomes a "person" at conception because that's when it becomes a "potential person."
A single human gene has the potential to be a person, so his argument fails.

A person becomes so when they are aware of their own self-existence. That requires a functioning brain.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-21-2018, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
2,846 posts, read 4,070,918 times
Reputation: 3047
Quote:
Originally Posted by LesLucid View Post
I disagree with one part of this. Life isn’t created de novo when an egg and sperm unite. There has to have been life before that; the sperm is alive, the egg is alive. Not only that, it is human life, carrying the unique genome of a single individual. If one of them is not alive, you get nothing on their union. Life is a continuum, it doesn’t just abruptly appear at fertilization. I only mention this because this seems to be a common refrain that “life begins.....” at some particular point. It began only once, as far as we know, millennia ago.
I agree, it takes life to make life, you absolutely correct in my opinion. Thank you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top