Tlaloc:
Actually you’ll find that using different words does indeed change what you are saying. For instance “I like candy” is different than “I hate candy” by virtue of changing a word.
A fetus before a certain point is not a living homo-sapien, only part of one. A part is not the whole…
In the above case, you did not change the essence of what you are saying. In the candy example, you changed the verb to the opposite, which is changing the essense.
The baby in the womb is a homo-sapien by scientific definition. You are simply creating your own defintions now and that is even less logical.
Tlaloc:
Then a fetus is not a human as it is not a complete organism.
It most certainly is a complete organism. You are confusing functionality with actuality. The baby in the womb is a complete organisim that relies on his/her mother to perform certain functions.
Tlaloc:
Actually I haven’t changed definitions you’ve simply been confused by examples. And actually you even got the first one wrong I never said anything about feeding itself. But more importantly the definition I’m using is when it becomes a complete organism unto itself.
Ok. Let’s just look at your current definition then (which seems to me to be a 3rd definition in 3 posts but for simplicity we’ll just look at this one). When does something become a complete organisim unto itself? When you say so? Again, what is the line to cross for the partial-organism to become a complete organism?
Tlaloc:
Those are completely subjective assertions which I don’t agree with.
Those were completely objective statements that are scientifically verifiable. You can disagree with objective fact, but don’t call this logic please.
Tlaloc:
Babies born at 4 months only survive if hooked up to machines which take the place of the mother. They are not yet complete organisms. But the point of that transition would occur while the fetus is still in the womb.
Apparently that point of transistion can be made outside of the womb also. Again, what is the definition of a complete organisim? When does partial become complete?
Tlaloc:
Pity, we could have saved this time if you only bothered to read where I already corrected such misunderstandings.
If they were corrected in any manner like you are doing here with changing your mind as you go along, I highly doubt you helped anyone gain understanding.
Tlaloc:
You most certainly can apply different definitions to things as time goes on. I am defining when a tissue becomes an organism. That definition doesn’t apply to any later stage in life whatsoever.
So something is a partial organism when it is dependent prior to X months/years of life but after that it is a complete organism irregardless if it becomes dependent again? If this is the case, then a complete organisim is a function of time. So you must define not only the physical characteristics of a complete organism but also the age requirement of a physical organism. What if 2 organisms reach the same age but 1 meets the physical requirements for completeness but the other does not? Isn’t then, the age requirement impossible to require without the physical requirement?
Tlaloc:
Well since you can’t even be bothered to actually determine what my definition is it’s hardly surprising you feel that way. Maybe once you’ve educated yourself on the topic you can speak to it with more authority. I suggest starting at the beginning of the thread. All your points and the various counterarguments are contained within.
Actually, I’m trying very hard to see what your definition is but it keeps changing. The fact that your defintions so far have been self-contradictory doesn’t mean that I haven’t tried to understand them. Are you saying there is a different defintion somewhere on the thread? Which post? We need a clear definition before we can start on “education”. Feel free to point me to posts in which you effectively counter argue my points as well.
Until then all you have done is a shallow attempt to convince everybody else of something not supported by the scientific community(aside from the pro-aborts pushing “population control”).