Abortion doesn't have anything to do with blood. An organism is a human once it possesses its own unique DNA, and that is at conception. The zygote begins its cell division as it follows the human timeline. I think the concept of life follows on from there.
The issue is more to do whether the mother's rights outweighs the fetus' rights, viability and sentience.
Last edited by Xotol; 23-02-2012 at 17:19.
(Original post by Apeiron)
I needed you when in dialogue with PinkMobilePhone
. I hope you are happy in your certainty.
I would say the only certainty I have is that I know I don't know anything...but to be certain about not knowing anything is the greatest certainty one can have...I think
(Original post by PinkMobilePhone)
My point is that the question of when life begins cannot possibly be a simple matter of opinion, just as it's not a matter of opinion that a spade is a spade.
Granted, we might not ever actually discover a pinpoint specific moment when life begins, (though yawn
's argument is compelling), but that doesn't mean that such a moment doesn't exist. It has to. There has to be one deadly accurate moment when life begins.
At the moment, it's a matter for conjecture, as nobody is 100% sure when it begins, but the moment has to have a definite starting point, it really isn't open to "cultural interpretation". It's not as though life begins for some people at conception, but other people aren't alive until the heart starts beating, or other people aren't alive until they are born...it's just not logical. We must all start our lives at the same point in our development, it's just that nobody can agree on what that point is. Doesn't mean all interpretations are correct though, there can only be 1 correct answer.
Yes yawn about stumbling across the fact that our concepts of time and other dualistic notions are super impositions on nature and the universe.
See this argument of yours here completely ignores the pure hard fact there there literally is no boundary between life and death...but you insist to play within the rules of the concepts of beginning and end when there is no such as beginning and end beyond the actual idea of 'beginning' and 'end'.
There is not 1 correct answer, there are either an infinite correct answers or no correct answer to this question. If you don't simply "yawn" away the issue of beginning and end then this debate thats being had may take an interesting rather than going around in circles knowing full well that there is no answer because the concepts we are trying to simplify the universe too are not real, i.e. the notion of beginning end, life non-life are concepts made up of humans, none of these things exist in the universe.
Last edited by _saleri_; 24-02-2012 at 15:23.
Unfortunately, the experts on the question of when human life begins - you know, the biological scientists that have been cited on the Princeton University website (see post #12) - have given a very precise answer. And I have no reason to believe that their answer to 'what is life' is equally as unequivocal as the thread question.
(Original post by _saleri_)
The investigation of the question 'when does life begin' will certainly be an interesting dialectic but there is no actual answer to the question, I think that its important to know that the answer to the question has nothing to do with nature really, it actually is about our own language and concepts.
However, I do agree that by asking 'what is life?' before 'when does life begin?' is one of language principally; which is why I mentioned the matter of semantics when it comes to debating what is in effect, the ending of human life after its begun.
Such is the nature of philosophy...it all about semantics when it comes down to it.
Last edited by yawn; 24-02-2012 at 15:37.