Abortion and Sentience

[Storm]

Actually you were foolish enough to ask the question, but sure please show your lack of an ability to prove your argument.

Well, you're not going to last long here, are you? :no:

 

[Rakhel]

Popcorn!! Peanuts!!! Get Your Peanuts Here!!!


opcorn:

 

[Hypersonic]

there is a medical condition, im not sure of its name, but its a condition where the pain receptors dont respond to pain. There are also paraplegics who have no sensations at all....yet they are very much alive

i dont think the feeling of 'pain' is the indicator for whether a life is a life.

Well pain reception was one part of the argument. Initially I was trying to establish that the feeling of pain, requires higher brain function. Along with judgment which I was trying to establish with Storm. Pain is not necessarily an answer to saying that a being is self-aware, I was establishing the counter argument that some anti-abortion advocates say that fetuses during abortion experience pain-which is utterly false.

The question I am asking is is a fetus "self-aware?" And if the fetus is self-aware is there demonstrative evidence that points that a fetus is self aware?

 

[Pegg]

Well pain reception was one part of the argument. Initially I was trying to establish that the feeling of pain, requires higher brain function. Along with judgment which I was trying to establish with Storm. Pain is not necessarily an answer to saying that a being is self-aware, I was establishing the counter argument that some anti-abortion advocates say that fetuses during abortion experience pain-which is utterly false.

The question I am asking is is a fetus "self-aware?" And if the fetus is self-aware is there demonstrative evidence that points that a fetus is self aware?

being self aware is no indication either because a new born baby is not self aware for at least the first year of its life. Its usually around the 12th month of life that it begins to recognize itself in a mirror...until then, it thinks its looking at another baby.

And are any of us self aware when we are asleep? That is a state of complete unconsciousness... should we take that as an indication that during that unconscious state we are not really human or alive?


And about feotus's feeling pain, i think it really depends on the stage of development. Anything after 12 weeks has been shown to experience pain... aborted fetus's have been pulled from the womb screaming before 20 weeks... Perhaps you should go to an abortion clinic and speak to nurses who assist in these sorts of procedures. We have a relative who is a nurse in a womans clinic and she has seen abortion up close. It is not the simple procedure it is made out to be....and what is removed is not simply a 'clump of blood' as some like to describe it.

 

[Hypersonic]

(1)being self aware is no indication either because a new born baby is not self aware for at least the first year of its life. Its usually around the 12th month of life that it begins to recognize itself in a mirror...until then, it thinks its looking at another baby.

(2) And are any of us self aware when we are asleep? That is a state of complete unconsciousness... should we take that as an indication that during that unconscious state we are not really human or alive?


(3) And about feotus's feeling pain, i think it really depends on the stage of development. Anything after 12 weeks has been shown to experience pain... aborted fetus's have been pulled from the womb screaming before 20 weeks... Perhaps you should go to an abortion clinic and speak to nurses who assist in these sorts of procedures. We have a relative who is a nurse in a womans clinic and she has seen abortion up close. It is not the simple procedure it is made out to be....and what is removed is not simply a 'clump of blood' as some like to describe it.

In response to position (1) this is the problem that anti-abortion advocates have to answer. What is personhood and does consciousness necessitate rights? In addition is the fetus aware and does awareness necessitate having rights? Is not having sentience ethnical exemption in abortion procedures? Regardless all of what you've said was already covered.

In response to position (2) I think you are oversimplifying the issue. Of course we are alive. We have an autonomic nervous system that controls our vital functions. Being sleep doesn't mean we are completely unaware, after all the brain isn't completely sleep during REM. I think comparing REM sleep to unconsciousness of a fetus I'm not sure was a good example. A fetus cant help being unconscious because its higher brain functions havent even developed yet prior to the third trimester.

In response to position (3) fetuses even at 24 weeks do not posses the wirings to transmit pain. Screaming fetuses? I highly doubt it. But if you don't want to take my word for it please review the following article:

http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-h...es-the-fetus-feel-pain-uk-report-says-no.html

 

[Hypersonic]

If sentience is anyway a definitive response to why abortion is unethical then at what point do we deem a fetus a self-aware entity, given the evidence that fetuses aren't self-aware?

 

[Pegg]

If sentience is anyway a definitive response to why abortion is unethical then at what point do we deem a fetus a self-aware entity, given the evidence that fetuses aren't self-aware?

If gasping for breath after being pulled from the womb is not enough 'self awareness' for you, then none of us should be considered 'alive'

 

[Acim]

In response to position (1) this is the problem that anti-abortion advocates have to answer. What is personhood and does consciousness necessitate rights?

Personhood is that which is initiated at moment of conception. Consciousness (out there, over yonder) doesn't necessitate rights. Consciousness (within, as Me) is that which necessitates rights and establishes said rights.

In addition is the fetus aware and does awareness necessitate having rights?

Feel I already answered the second question and that this answers the first one.

Is not having sentience ethnical exemption in abortion procedures? Regardless all of what you've said was already covered.

Ethnical? Sensical?

I would say, for me, not having sentience does not make for ethical exemption with regard to abortion procedures.

In response to position (2) I think you are oversimplifying the issue. Of course we are alive. We have an autonomic nervous system that controls our vital functions. Being sleep doesn't mean we are completely unaware, after all the brain isn't completely sleep during REM. I think comparing REM sleep to unconsciousness of a fetus I'm not sure was a good example. A fetus cant help being unconscious because its higher brain functions havent even developed yet prior to the third trimester.

Don't we all assume that this fetus thing, that was conceived, holds enormously high likelihood to become that which will have higher brain functions, similar to human child? If yes, and if not willing to buy into Pro-Life position, on principle alone, would we / are we comfortable with notion of killing that which is visibly conceived and known to have high likelihood of relatively fast becoming human (child)?

In response to position (3) fetuses even at 24 weeks do not posses the wirings to transmit pain.

To me, this is another argument. It is related, but is distinct from what I feel is at core, and which I alluded to in first response I gave; plus that of knowledge we have that there is enormous likelihood for fetus becoming human entity. Not merely potential like say sperm has. Cause that has likelihood, of itself, that is I would say rather low. But fetus likelihood is enormously high, of itself.

What say you?

 

[Otherright]

Actually, life begins prior to conception since both the sperm and egg cells are living things! So since life exist prior to conception perhaps it is best to target the main ethical issue here which is sentience.

So, you are arguing that life begins before conception simply because a sperm and an egg are living things. This is a fallacy called denying the antecedent. (Its not a straw man Sunstone because it isn't a misrepresentation of the position).

I thought I should tell you your argument is flawed and the folks on here will tear you apart for that.

Otherwise, I don't condone the killing of anything that will eventually be sentient. But, I really don't have a dog in this fight, because I am a man, and I don't have to make this decision.

 

[Hypersonic]

Personhood is that which is initiated at moment of conception. Consciousness (out there, over yonder) doesn't necessitate rights. Consciousness (within, as Me) is that which necessitates rights and establishes said rights.



Feel I already answered the second question and that this answers the first one.



Ethnical? Sensical?

I would say, for me, not having sentience does not make for ethical exemption with regard to abortion procedures.



Don't we all assume that this fetus thing, that was conceived, holds enormously high likelihood to become that which will have higher brain functions, similar to human child? If yes, and if not willing to buy into Pro-Life position, on principle alone, would we / are we comfortable with notion of killing that which is visibly conceived and known to have high likelihood of relatively fast becoming human (child)?



To me, this is another argument. It is related, but is distinct from what I feel is at core, and which I alluded to in first response I gave; plus that of knowledge we have that there is enormous likelihood for fetus becoming human entity. Not merely potential like say sperm has. Cause that has likelihood, of itself, that is I would say rather low. But fetus likelihood is enormously high, of itself.

What say you?

I recognize a fetus as a thing (a human thing) however I am on the fence of a fetus having rights.

 

[Hypersonic]

So, you are arguing that life begins before conception simply because a sperm and an egg are living things. This is a fallacy called denying the antecedent. (Its not a straw man Sunstone because it isn't a misrepresentation of the position).

I thought I should tell you your argument is flawed and the folks on here will tear you apart for that.

Otherwise, I don't condone the killing of anything that will eventually be sentient. But, I really don't have a dog in this fight, because I am a man, and I don't have to make this decision.

Simply telling my argument is flawed is not necessarily contradicting nor refuting my statement. A zygote is not a person. Although the sperm and egg are living cells the zygote doesnt have the same rights as a toddler. But again, where are the people that would tear my argument up?

 

[Hypersonic]

If gasping for breath after being pulled from the womb is not enough 'self awareness' for you, then none of us should be considered 'alive'

Grasping for air is not self awareness its an automatic function of the brain tell us "Oh crap we need oxygen." Self awareness in my view is me recognizing that I exist and I am a distinct entity apart from other things.

 

[Otherright]

In response to position (2) I think you are oversimplifying the issue. Of course we are alive. We have an autonomic nervous system that controls our vital functions. Being sleep doesn't mean we are completely unaware, after all the brain isn't completely sleep during REM. I think comparing REM sleep to unconsciousness of a fetus I'm not sure was a good example. A fetus cant help being unconscious because its higher brain functions havent even developed yet prior to the third trimester.

But being asleep does mean that you are completely unaware of stimuli. Electrical impulses in TES go absolutely nowhere beyond local in a person that isn't conscious. However, this doesn't mean that its OK to kill sleeping people just because they currently aren't self-aware.

Also, higher brain functions aren't all that great in newborns. I'd hate to see how your research would deal with this. The problem here is level of self-awareness in infants and late term fetuses, which there is no way to genuinely answer. You can only make assumptions.

The end result, however, is going to be a self-aware being. I personally, couldn't destroy it no more than I could take a hammer to a puppy.

I am of the opinion that all life is sacred, but like I said, I ultimately don't have to make the decision to go term.

 

[Hypersonic]

But being asleep does mean that you are completely unaware of stimuli. Electrical impulses in TES go absolutely nowhere beyond local in a person that isn't conscious. However, this doesn't mean that its OK to kill sleeping people just because they currently aren't self-aware.

Also, higher brain functions aren't all that great in newborns. I'd hate to see how your research would deal with this. The problem here is level of self-awareness in infants and late term fetuses, which there is no way to genuinely answer. You can only make assumptions.

The end result, however, is going to be a self-aware being. I personally, couldn't destroy it no more than I could take a hammer to a puppy.

I am of the opinion that all life is sacred, but like I said, I ultimately don't have to make the decision to go term.

My point was the brain is active even during sleep. REM sleep remember? I don't see how self-awareness would be a problem. Fetuses are essentially in a state of "sedation" until they are born.

 

[Hypersonic]

Here is a good question tell me how does a zygote have the same rights as a dog? A zygote has no brain, no form completely unaware of anything. The only thing we have is potential. It is potentially something! But without sentience or an ability to be self-aware. It is essentially parasitic in its organic stage. I do not see how a zygote has or should have right.

 

[Pegg]

Grasping for air is not self awareness its an automatic function of the brain tell us "Oh crap we need oxygen." Self awareness in my view is me recognizing that I exist and I am a distinct entity apart from other things.

well even animals dont have that sort of self awareness, yet they have legal rights and we put laws in place to protect the welfare of animals

so... if a human embryo is not considered 'life' because it is not selfaware, then nor are most other creatures on this planet.

 

[Pegg]

My point was the brain is active even during sleep. REM sleep remember? I don't see how self-awareness would be a problem. Fetuses are essentially in a state of "sedation" until they are born.

that statment is simply false.

babies in the womb have been shown to respond to outside stimuli. they have been seen to jump at sudden noises and their heatbeat changes to the sound of some music

and premature babies have been shown to thrive better when they have regular human touch...some natal units even put a heartbeat pulse devise inside the humidicrib because the babies respond to the sound of the heartbeat. Some of these premi babies are born as young as 28 weeks...the same age that abortions are performed on many others.

there is no excuse for deliberate ignorance on this matter. A baby is a baby no matter how old it is.

 

[Hypersonic]

well even animals dont have that sort of self awareness, yet they have legal rights and we put laws in place to protect the welfare of animals

so... if a human embryo is not considered 'life' because it is not selfaware, then nor are most other creatures on this planet.

What do you mean that sort of self-awareness? Were you referring to my statement about oxygen? I'm slightly confused.

 

[Pegg]

What do you mean that sort of self-awareness? Were you referring to my statement about oxygen? I'm slightly confused.

have you never watched a bird challenge its own reflection in a window or mirror?

And this cat really thinks its fighting another cat... This proves that many animals, even intelligent animals like cats, are not selfaware...they dont have a sense of self like we do.

[youtube]SHnjNSqMNNY[/youtube]
‪Cat fights her reflection‬‏ - YouTube


The cat does not realise that its a "distinct entity apart from other things" So is self awareness really a good way to judge if something is alive?

 

[Hypersonic]

that statment is simply false.

babies in the womb have been shown to respond to outside stimuli. they have been seen to jump at sudden noises and their heatbeat changes to the sound of some music

and premature babies have been shown to thrive better when they have regular human touch...some natal units even put a heartbeat pulse devise inside the humidicrib because the babies respond to the sound of the heartbeat. Some of these premi babies are born as young as 28 weeks...the same age that abortions are performed on many others.

there is no excuse for deliberate ignorance on this matter. A baby is a baby no matter how old it is.

Pegg have you looked at the link I posted? There is a quote that says the fetus is "in an unconscious [sedate like] state."