Joined: Jan. 2006
|How about an answer which actually explains something? Why do you define human life as beginning at conception? How do you know? What criteria are you using?|
Note: If you believe human life can't be defined including its individual beginning then nothing I say will have much impact.
But here we go again.
I define human life using all the available information I have at my disposal.
First, I use the common definition of "conception." Conception means both the "beginning" and the coming together of sperm and egg to form a unique human organism.
That why I state that MY LIFE began AT MY conception.
But there is more and I approach it from a different direction.
If we assume that Nike's LIFE does NOT BEGAN at HIS conception then WHEN did it begin?
It seems to me that you only have 3 choices. Please add more if you like.
(I assume that you believe that you are alive and human)
1. Nike's life has NO beginning.
2. Nike's life BEGAN before conception.
3. Nike's life BEGAN after conception.
When we evaluate #1 then either Nike is eternal or his life came from non-life. There is NO scientific evidence for either of these propositions.
When we evaluate #2 we must invoke the "life from life" position. Your life ACTUALLY began at the OOL and history unraveled much to your delight. Everything happened perfectly over the course of several billions of years and now we have Nike. You one old son of a gun! But, are you an individual human life or are you a mere conscious outgrowth of one very large and very old Single Living Entity?
When we evalute #3, we delve into the debate concerning consciousness. I think it is clear that consciousness develops over time. I don't think there is ANY DIRECT EVIDENCE of newborn consciousness (I am conscious, I am newborn!. There is perhaps evidence of a low-degree of consciousness? But this consciousness was ALREADY developing before birth and most likely started at conception. There is NO evidence to suggest ootherwise. Is there?
When I say that the definition of human life is ME, this is taking into account that many on this forum claim to be unable to define human life. Outside of someone claiming their humaneness, what are these ambivalent scientists going to accept as a definition?