Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Christianity Today Op Ed

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Yeah, we do chrawnus. Consciousness as any sort of manifestation of mind in this universe for a human being doesnt appear in a fetus until after the brain forms.
    No we don't. We don't have any visible indication of consciousness until after the brain forms, which is a completely different matter altogether. Whether or not there's any consciousness prior to that is something we cannot accurately assess scientifically, because the issue of whether the soul exists before the formation of the brain (or at all) and can be said to be conscious in any sort of fashion is a metaphysical issue that science is not even in principle equipped to handle.

    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    I dont have any problem with that as an absolute truth, nor do I see any necessary conflict with scripture in saying that.
    Unless you presuppose materialism/physicalism, and I know you don't, I don't see how you arrive at the conclusion that it's an absolute truth at all. It cannot be through science, because science is incapable of giving us the answer.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      No we don't. We don't have any visible indication of consciousness until after the brain forms, which is a completely different matter altogether. Whether or not there's any consciousness prior to that is something we cannot accurately assess scientifically, because the issue of whether the soul exists before the formation of the brain (or at all) and can be said to be conscious in any sort of fashion is a metaphysical issue that science is not even in principle equipped to handle.



      Unless you presuppose materialism/physicalism, and I know you don't, I don't see how you arrive at the conclusion that it's an absolute truth at all. It cannot be through science, because science is incapable of giving us the answer.
      Would be good here to separate the term "consciousness" pretty far from "soul", since consciousness is a scientific concept that can be (and has been) heavily impacted directly through physical manipulation. What we know about consciousness is that it's a mental condition emergent from brain function.

      Whether there's some sort of consciousness beyond that is, as you say, metaphysically unknown but also irrelevant for discussion here -- one could, using the framework, argue that contraception and sterilization are likewise wrong/should be illegal because they prevent a soul from attaching to its destined physical body.

      --Sam
      "I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sam View Post
        ...
        any effort to even clarify the relevant terms and work through the relevant logic is anathema, as it might introduce a crack of doubt in the minds of people who clearly have not and will not put their argument to rigorous analytical test. There's no discussion, only defensive argument.

        --Sam
        Is the Crack of doubt you referred doubt about the topic, (abortion is wrong), or is the worry that the crack of doubt is about the infallibility of the argument, and the infallibility of the one making the argument.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
          No we don't. We don't have any visible indication of consciousness until after the brain forms, which is a completely different matter altogether. Whether or not there's any consciousness prior to that is something we cannot accurately assess scientifically, because the issue of whether the soul exists before the formation of the brain (or at all) and can be said to be conscious in any sort of fashion is a metaphysical issue that science is not even in principle equipped to handle.
          There are two fronts here Chrawnus. On the spiritual front, we cannot 'know' what the spirit is or when it appears. But unless we accept reincarnation as a reality, we have to accept that the soul of a person emerges or is created for the person sometime at or after conception. Whatever that soul or spirit is, and whenever it happens to be created, is a matter of religious belief. It does not enter into the law about what a fetus is in terms of whether or not aborting it should or should not be legal because codifying religious belief into law violates the establishment clause.

          From a scientific point of view consciousness is related to brain activity but there is no clear way to fully isolate it. (There is an interesting announcement on that here)

          But if consciousness resides solely in the brain, it can't legally be deemed to exist without it. So from a legal point of view, which can't be based on religious suppositions, there can't be a human being with any sort of consciousness in there till there is a brain. And so - from a secular, legal point of view - there is no reason to ascribe personhood or rights separate from the mother of any real sort to the fetus prior to that - unless we delve into the realm of potential. The potential to gain a consciousness exists, even though the consciousness (from a legal/scientific point of view) doesn't/can't exist yet.

          Scripturally, we have Exodus which clearly does not assign the same person-hood to the fetus as to the mother. If the fetus dies from the blow, there is no life for a life. But if the mother does, there is. If we accept this law as being from God, then that is a clear indication that a fetus does not yet have the status of person. Now if we take the view this was a purely cultural manifestation based on the Jewish culture's connection of the breath with the soul, believing that since the baby had not yet breathed it did not have a soul, then you could argue the Bible is neutral on the issue. But such a view then must turn to science to define when the fetus becomes that which would be a person, and that leads us where I have been arguing. (One could use John leaping in Elizabeth's womb at Mary's presence to indicate the soul was present by 6 months, but that would be consistent with the idea of quickening for ensoulment and would not be contrary to the idea the soul comes after conception or anything I've been arguing). Ideas that focus on that God knows a person at birth or before birth are irrelevant since God knows us before we were born, even from the beginning of time, which means that is not talking about when our soul appears but God's infinite knowledge of all that was, is a and will be.

          Beyond the above mentioned classes of discussion in scripture, is there anything else in scripture you believe implies the soul is present at conception?

          The summary below reflects my current understanding. I am open to any scriptural or scientific argument you can make contrary to it (but not 'what if' speculation):

          In the end, in terms of defining whether abortion is the moral equivalent of murder, AFAIK, all the religious and scientific evidence we have* points to 'not at first'. That there is some time after conception that the fetus takes on its newfound personhood, and at that point it becomes en entity worthy of lex talonis, a life for a life. And at that point, abortion is murder.

          *Extra-biblical speculation about maybe the soul is ... - is just that - extra-biblical. Unless you know of something I don't, what we have in the Bible doesn't really support the idea the soul is attached at conception. The entire Jewish culture in fact tends towards the idea that the soul doesn't exist till birth itself. The idea the soul comes at conception is more an opinion that originated (quite long ago in fact) with the Greeks and became part of Catholic teaching about 150 years ago - per my link in the previous post.

          Unless you presuppose materialism/physicalism, and I know you don't, I don't see how you arrive at the conclusion that it's an absolute truth at all. It cannot be through science, because science is incapable of giving us the answer.
          As I said - AFAIK, Biblical texts (what little there is) point to the idea the soul comes or emerges after conception. As does science. So spiritually, I don't see any reason to presume anything else. And I tend to think rank speculation about spiritual things is dangerous. Go with what the Bible teaches, incorporate scientific understanding where appropriate. And on this the Bible teaches very little.

          My absolutism in this conversation is based on the fact we are talking about legally treating abortion as murder, and there is nothing that can or likely will ever support in a physical/material sense (on which our laws are based) the idea of any sort of mind in the fetus prior to the formation of the brain. And without some sort of mind, legally (and for all practical purposes in any other sense) there is no person there.
          Last edited by oxmixmudd; 01-24-2020, 08:10 AM.
          My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

          If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

          This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

          Comment


          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
            There are two fronts here Chrawnus. On the spiritual front, we cannot 'know' what the spirit is or when it appears. But unless we accept reincarnation as a reality, we have to accept that the soul of a person emerges or is created for the person sometime at or after conception. Whatever that soul or spirit is, and whenever it happens to be created, is a matter of religious belief. It does not enter into the law about what a fetus is in terms of whether or not aborting it should or should not be legal because codifying religious belief into law violates the establishment clause.

            From a scientific point of view consciousness is related to brain activity but there is no clear way to fully isolate it. (There is an interesting announcement on that here)

            But if consciousness resides solely in the brain, it can't legally be deemed to exist without it. So from a legal point of view, which can't be based on religious suppositions, there can't be a human being with any sort of consciousness in there till there is a brain. And so - from a secular, legal point of view - there is no reason to ascribe personhood or rights separate from the mother of any real sort to the fetus prior to that - unless we delve into the realm of potential. The potential to gain a consciousness exists, even though the consciousness (from a legal/scientific point of view) doesn't/can't exist yet.

            Scripturally, we have Exodus which clearly does not assign the same person-hood to the fetus as to the mother. If the fetus dies from the blow, there is no life for a life. But if the mother does, there is. If we accept this law as being from God, then that is a clear indication that a fetus does not yet have the status of person. Now if we take the view this was a purely cultural manifestation based on the Jewish culture's connection of the breath with the soul, believing that since the baby had not yet breathed it did not have a soul, then you could argue the Bible is neutral on the issue. But such a view then must turn to science to define when the fetus becomes that which would be a person, and that leads us where I have been arguing. (One could use John leaping in Elizabeth's womb at Mary's presence to indicate the soul was present by 6 months, but that would be consistent with the idea of quickening for ensoulment and would not be contrary to the idea the soul comes after conception or anything I've been arguing). Ideas that focus on that God knows a person at birth or before birth are irrelevant since God knows us before we were born, even from the beginning of time, which means that is not talking about when our soul appears but God's infinite knowledge of all that was, is a and will be.

            Beyond the above mentioned classes of discussion in scripture, is there anything else in scripture you believe implies the soul is present at conception?

            The summary below reflects my current understanding. I am open to any scriptural or scientific argument you can make contrary to it (but not 'what if' speculation):

            In the end, in terms of defining whether abortion is the moral equivalent of murder, AFAIK, all the religious and scientific evidence we have* points to 'not at first'. That there is some time after conception that the fetus takes on its newfound personhood, and at that point it becomes en entity worthy of lex talonis, a life for a life. And at that point, abortion is murder.

            *Extra-biblical speculation about maybe the soul is ... - is just that - extra-biblical. Unless you know of something I don't, what we have in the Bible doesn't really support the idea the soul is attached at conception. The entire Jewish culture in fact tends towards the idea that the soul doesn't exist till birth itself. The idea the soul comes at conception is more an opinion that originated (quite long ago in fact) with the Greeks and became part of Catholic teaching about 150 years ago - per my link in the previous post.



            As I said - AFAIK, Biblical texts (what little there is) point to the idea the soul comes or emerges after conception. As does science. So spiritually, I don't see any reason to presume anything else. And I tend to think rank speculation about spiritual things is dangerous. Go with what the Bible teaches, incorporate scientific understanding where appropriate. And on this the Bible teaches very little.

            My absolutism in this conversation is based on the fact we are talking about legally treating abortion as murder, and there is nothing that can or likely will ever support in a physical/material sense (on which our laws are based) the idea of any sort of mind in the fetus prior to the formation of the brain. And without some sort of mind, legally (and for all practical purposes in any other sense) there is no person there.
            So, if I invent a microwave device that solely eradicates a fetus from its mother's womb, as long as it is under 2 months or so, I can walk around town zapping every woman I see, and should get in no trouble because I didn't kill a person?
            That's what
            - She

            Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
            - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

            I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
            - Stephen R. Donaldson

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
              We've trod this path before. I know what Jim means. He's made the distinction many times before.
              Your argumentation referenced a fully functional brain, which is not what I meant. So it would be logical to assume you didn't understand what I meant since you reply was based on something I clearly didn't mean.

              So what drove an argument against my posts that was structured around an idea you knew I wasn't using?
              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

              Comment


              • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                Your argumentation referenced a fully functional brain, which is not what I meant. So it would be logical to assume you didn't understand what I meant since you reply was based on something I clearly didn't mean.

                So what drove an argument against my posts that was structured around an idea you knew I wasn't using?
                You refer to consciousness, which isn't a part of a non-functional brain.
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                - Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  So, if I invent a microwave device that solely eradicates a fetus from its mother's womb, as long as it is under 2 months or so, I can walk around town zapping every woman I see, and should get in no trouble because I didn't kill a person?
                  Oh you'd still be in a good bit of trouble, because even if the fetus is legally part of the mothers body and not a separate human being, YOU have no right to kill it. That would be assault. And further, that potential to be a human, that is not trivial - even though several of you seem to argue as if the fetus not yet a full fledged human being is worthless, which no-one is saying or would ever say. Very black and white, all or nothing sort of thinking. No, the potential to become a human person makes it the most valuable thing there is excepting a human person.
                  Last edited by oxmixmudd; 01-24-2020, 08:29 AM.
                  My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                  If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                  This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                    You refer to consciousness, which isn't a part of a non-functional brain.
                    Non-functional and fully-functional are not by any means the only two options. After my cycling accident, my brain was not 'fully functional', but it was a very long way from non-functional. 'I' was still quite there, even though for a short time I was unconscious.
                    My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                    If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                    This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                      Oh you'd still be in a good bit of trouble, because even if the fetus is legally part of the mothers body and not a seperate human being, YOU have no right to kill it.
                      Why not? It'd be like cutting grass. No brain = no person after all.

                      That would be assault.
                      No it wouldn't. I didn't affect her body at all. She is still whole and intact. Same as before her pregnancy.

                      And further, that potential to be a human, that is not trivial - even though several of you seem to argue as if the fetus not yet a full fledged human being it is worthless, which no-one is saying or would ever say. Very black and white, all or nothing sort of thinking. No, the potential to become a human person makes it the most valuable thing there is excepting a human person.
                      Sorry, but the "potential" argument has been discarded by Sam. I'm sorry, Jim. Life IS black and white. A human is a human from the moment of conception. EVERYTHING after that is simply specialization.
                      That's what
                      - She

                      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                      - Stephen R. Donaldson

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                        Why not? It'd be like cutting grass. No brain = no person after all.
                        When you feel like returning to some semblance of reasoned discussion, I'll be here.
                        My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                        If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                        This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          When you feel like returning to some semblance of reasoned discussion, I'll be here.
                          You haven't had a reasonable post thus far. Why stop now? I've discussed the actual biology of human growth and development and embryology, as has MM. You and Sam have gone off about "head in a jar", cartoons, and science fiction. I'll take the reasoned side of science over your unreasonable biological ignorance.
                          That's what
                          - She

                          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                          - Stephen R. Donaldson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                            You haven't had a reasonable post thus far. Why stop now? I've discussed the actual biology of human growth and development and embryology, as has MM. You and Sam have gone off about "head in a jar", cartoons, and science fiction. I'll take the reasoned side of science over your unreasonable biological ignorance.
                            And here I thought we'd had a reasoned discussion up to your last couple of taunts. Should I be more skeptical of your honesty in the future?
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              I'll go back to ignoring your big pompous self.
                              not sure how you got 'pompous' out of that, but then again maintaining any conversation with you is an exercise in walking on eggshells lest you become 'offended' in some way, so I'm not overly surprised.
                              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                                You haven't had a reasonable post thus far..
                                It's not him - its everybody else.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                139 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                365 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                112 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                197 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                364 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X