Ensoulment

[LilyM]

I think the ability to mate and produce young could be a boundary marker of species.

A pro-abortion argument is that the ‘tissue’ is a parasite and not yet a human.

So? Fleas are parasites, certain species of plant are parasites, viruses are parasites. Yet no-one would deny that a flea is always a flea, a strangler fig always a strangler fig or a cold virus always a cold virus - from the very first second they come into being.

 

[Newbie2]

But it still seems pointless to me to argue about ensoulment from a bioethics point of view, since many people do not even believe that such an entity exists. And a human soul, being immaterial, cannot be demonstrated biologically. But we know without doubt when a new human being begins–at conception. And human beings ought to be given equal protection as to their unalienable right to life.

Well, there is the argument right there…too many mistakenly make it about whether or not life begins at conception, and it’s clear that it does, otherwise one has a dead embryo!

So what determines whether one is a human being or not? A soul. A human corpse is human…but not a human being. We don’t refer to a dead person as that person, but his or her body.

So? Fleas are parasites, certain species of plant are parasites, viruses are parasites. Yet no-one would deny that a flea is always a flea, a strangler fig always a strangler fig or a cold virus always a cold virus - from the very first second they come into being.

What, pray tell, is a strangler fig?

 

[JimG]

So what determines whether one is a human being or not? A soul.

While that is true, it remains a philosophical truism, not a biological one. I suspect that many of those who advert to some uncertainty about when the body is ensouled, (as a pro-choice argument) really do not believe in the existence of the soul.

Since the human soul is non-material, it cannot be a subject of biological investigation. Yet there is no biological uncertainty about when a new individual of the human species begins: everyone knows that a new individual of the human species has its beginning at conception.

The only argument seems to be about whether or not to assign less value to some individuals because they are at an earlier stage of development (or a later stage, if one wishes to eliminate the elderly.)

 

[LilyM]

What, pray tell, is a strangler fig?

Sorry, it’s a type of tropical plant - it’s basically parasitical en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangler_fig

 

[Benadam]

So? Fleas are parasites, certain species of plant are parasites, viruses are parasites.

exactly.

Yet no-one would deny that a flea is always a flea, a strangler fig always a strangler fig or a cold virus always a cold virus - from the very first second they come into being.

The argument almost works because all life is parasitic at some point.

 

[Benadam]

If the ability to mate and produce is a boundary marker for an individual of a species, then I guess we would have to say that no one is a human being until adolescence. And indeed, up to that time, (and beyond) they may be “parasites!” That’s a long time to go without the benefit of being human.

That reminds me that some ancient pagan’s considered the ability to reason as the sign of ensoulment. Up till 5 or so a human child is not human yet. I wonder if that thinking is what the conscience is told to deaden it.

 

[JimG]

That reminds me that some ancient pagan’s considered the ability to reason as the sign of ensoulment. Up till 5 or so a human child is not human yet. I wonder if that thinking is what the conscience is told to deaden it.

Some high school and college teachers might say that the ability to reason is even more delayed than the ability to procreate! This could put a lot of adolescents in danger!

 

[RachelsAlumni]

Some high school and college teachers might say that the ability to reason is even more delayed than the ability to procreate! This could put a lot of adolescents in danger!

 

[mangy_dog]

Well, there is the argument right there…too many mistakenly make it about whether or not life begins at conception, and it’s clear that it does, otherwise one has a dead embryo!

So what determines whether one is a human being or not? A soul. A human corpse is human…but not a human being. We don’t refer to a dead person as that person, but his or her body.

What, pray tell, is a strangler fig?

See!! but therein lies the problem with us “logical, intellectual and reasoning” persons.

We give the human being so many names, each corresponding to one of its developmental stages and then decide that each one of these developmental stages has or doesn’t have “life” or “soul” or “spirit” or “animation” or the quality of this or that or the other thing!

We even split hairs about the term “human being”, by separating the “human” from the “being”. So that it fits our petty discernments and scrutinies.

How arrogant and ignorant! God created man - and from the moment of conception to the moment of death and decomposition, he or she is a creatiion of God, made in His image and likeness. Image and likeness that will be reunited with its soul/spirit on the last day!

Talk about getting wrapped around the axle!