On Mar 25, 2009, at 5:44 PM, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
> You're throwing emotional issues into the discussion. (01)
Nonsense. While in fact some people do get emotional over the issue
of whether a fetus is a human being or a human person for reasons
usually related to the question of abortion, I had no intention
whatever of appealing to emotion in my response. Rather, I was simply
pointing out that it is a your bald assertion that a fetus is not a
human being is, as a matter of empirical fact, highly controversial.
It is not the obvious truth you seem to be assuming it to be.
Moreover, that a viable fetus shortly before birth is a human being is
almost universally agreed upon in philosophy, medical science, and
law. Exactly *when* in the gestation period it is first to be counted
a human being is of course a matter of great debate, but virtually no
one doubts that a healthy fetus one day, say, before birth has
achieved that status. (02)
> I'm only talking about the definition of a "part". The fetus is a
> part of the mother, in the same sense that a kidney is a part of the
> mother. (03)
Only in a strictly mereological sense that is irrelevant to the status
of the fetus as a human being. Unlike a viable fetus, a kidney is not
capable of continued existence apart from the mother's body. A viable
fetus is a separate organism with its own DNA that, while contingently
dependent on the mother's body, is capable of existing independently
of it. Its differences from a kidney are far more profound than its
similarities. (04)
-chris (05)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Menzel" <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
> To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 3:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] An Ontology Modeling Different Age Groups
>
>
>> On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Richard H. McCullough wrote:
>>> From the viewpoint of metaphysics/epistemology, a fetus is not a
>>> human
>>> being, it is a part of a human being (the mother).
>>
>> Among philosophers, medical ethicists, etc, this is an entirely
>> open and
>> controversial question.
>>
>>> After birth, it is a human being (the newborn).
>>
>> Are you proposing that we become human beings only after birth? Not
>> that I'm interested in arguing the point, but that proposal is
>> obviously
>> false.
>>
>> -chris
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|