So what is the difference between a potential and an actual human being?

[VanitasVanitatum]

It’s been estimated that between 40 and 60% of embryos die between fertilization and birth under natural conditions. So, assuming that all those fertilized embryos are human beings, that means that about half of human beings naturally die before they’re born.

That’s not relevant. It doesn’t say anything one way or another.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

There is a difference between human and human being. The male sperm is human. The woman’s egg is human. The blatocyst is human. The cells within the blastocyst are human. The walls of those cells are human.

None of these things are a human being. None of them are ‘a person’.

Hmm…alright, would you please share your definitions of human, human being, being human, both actual human being and potential human being, and person?

What is this? A quiz? Do I get a pass mark?

No thanks. I’m too busy at the moment for hoop jumping. How about you give yours and I can say yay or nay. Save me some time.

 

[Thorolfr]

Thorolfr:

It’s been estimated that between 40 and 60% of embryos die between fertilization and birth under natural conditions. So, assuming that all those fertilized embryos are human beings, that means that about half of human beings naturally die before they’re born.

That’s not relevant. It doesn’t say anything one way or another.

Whether a one day old fertilized egg and a two year old baby are both considered to be a “human being” or a “person” is totally a matter of how those words are defined. And it’s a matter of religious beliefs which cannot be proven one way or another as to whether either one has a soul. There will never be a way to resolve this issue when there is no agreement about what these words mean or when people have differing world views. These kinds of discussions will just go around in circles.

 

[JimG]

I’ve heard that mentioned several times in various threads, but I’ve not seen a clinical study that would confirm it.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

There will never be a way to resolve this issue when there is no agreement about what these words mean or when people have differing world views. These kinds of discussions will just go around in circles.

That’s inavoidable.

 

[JerryZ]

The only instance where someone can declare that a “Potential Human Being” is “present” is when from the many Spermatozoa 1 achieves the union with its counterpart “the Egg” and once they are combined and the new DNA is formed from the 2 halves a NEW human being is present. His/Her DNA will be immutable save for random mutations when the DNA replicates, until the death of that human that could happen from: Abortion, sickness, accident or hopefully ripe old age.
Peace!

 

[jochoa]

What is this? A quiz? Do I get a pass mark?

When you take the time to declare definition, you will find better solutions to your positions, whether it be strength in what you believe, including a better ability to help share your belief, or perhaps you will come to understand the opposing position better.

No thanks. I’m too busy at the moment for hoop jumping. How about you give yours and I can say yay or nay. Save me some time.

A human being is an organism of the homo sapien species.
A new human being occurs the moment a sperm fertilizes an egg or when a zygote generates identical siblings.

Since the union of sperm and egg creates an actual person, every sperm and egg are potential human beings.

A “per”-“son” means “of” the "Son,” aka a child of God. How about that for irony!
Though a person and an actual human being can be used interchangeably…,

 

[Thorolfr]

His/Her DNA will be immutable save for random mutations when the DNA replicates, until the death of that human that could happen from: Abortion, sickness, accident or hopefully ripe old age.
Peace!

Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t consider my own DNA to be the most important thing in making me the person I am today. It’s undoubtedly true that the one celled fertilized egg that developed over 7 months into the baby I was when I was born and the person I am now had almost identical DNA, but beyond that, I wouldn’t consider the two to be the same human being in any realistic sense. That one celled fertilized egg had no brain or heart or personality. It had none of the life experiences I’ve had which are very important in making me who I am today. And at one day old, it probably only had a 50% chance of survival.

 

[JerryZ]

Ah but no one is trying to say that the DNA by itself makes the person, obviously there are many concomitant factors that add to the human experience. However the “baseline” of the human being is that unique DNA that each one of us got at the moment of conception.
As for the DNA changing with age yes as stated before mutations occur when the cell that are constantly reproducing in our body make copies of the DNA and errors are introduced. However there are some cell that are NOT replaced in your body, they therefore retain the original DNA from the moment those cells were created at their particular development stage.
Peace!

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

What is this? A quiz? Do I get a pass mark?

When you take the time to declare definition, you will find better solutions to your positions, whether it be strength in what you believe, including a better ability to help share your belief, or perhaps you will come to understand the opposing position better.

Since the union of sperm and egg creates an actual person…

You think a blostocyst can be described as a person. We have no means to have a reasonable discussion.

 

[Vico]

Since the attempt to a conduct a respectful discussion about abortion was unsuccessful, let’s try it again. It was unsuccessful since this question was left unanswered.

What is the definition of a human being? At which point of the development would qualify the entity to be called a new human being? Or when does the potential human being become an actual human being?

The stages are: DNA, cell, stem cell, zygote, blastocyst, tissue, organ, embryo, fetus, newborn.

To help you, here comes an analogy: “let’s take a large piece of marble. The sculptor starts to work on it. When does the potential statue become an actual statue?”

Jeremiah 1

5 Before I formed thee in the bowels of thy mother, I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb, I sanctified thee, and made thee a prophet unto the nations.

Jeremiah is a human. The potential Jeremiah was known before formation, the actual Jerimiah exists at formation. Formation begins with the natural fertilization, and from then exists the spiritual immortal part in the human being that animates the body.

 

[Abrosz]

What does potential mean?
According to Webster it mean existing in possibility.
Possibility means something that is possible
What then is a potential human. That would be sperm and egg. Those are the components that make up possibility. Once those come together it is no longer a potential but a reality.

So the sperm and the egg are a possible zygote.
When they are combined it becomes an actual zygote.
The zygote is a potential blastocyst.
With time and favorable circumstances it can become an actual blastocyst.
Etc… no need to look at every step.
Eventually the fetus is separated from the woman by cutting the umbilical cord, and then the fetus - the potential baby becomes and actual human being.

I wish that y’all would not sweep the act of birth “under the rug”.

 

[Abrosz]

None of these things are a human being. None of them are ‘a person’.

Also let’s not forget that word “human” can be either a noun or and adjective. Even when it is used as a noun, it is just a short form of a “human being”, where “human” is an adjective.

 

[goout]

Freddy:

None of these things are a human being. None of them are ‘a person’.

Also let’s not forget that word “human” can be either a noun or and adjective. Even when it is used as a noun, it is just a short form of a “human being”, where “human” is an adjective.

How about 3/5 of a person? Can I get 3/5?

 

[Abrosz]

How about 3/5 of a person? Can I get 3/5?

Sure. Why not? Can you figure out the how?

 

[goout]

goout:

How about 3/5 of a person? Can I get 3/5?

Sure. Why not? Can you figure out the how?

Magnanimity! Awesome. 3/5 of a human being is a start, thanks.

 

[jochoa]

You think a blostocyst can be described as a person. We have no means to have a reasonable discussion.

Well, good talk, Grizwald.

 

[o_mlly]

None of these things are a human being.

The OP hasn’t responded. Do you have an answer?

… what species is that growing, irritating, moving, metabolizing, living organism if not human.

 

[Gorgias]

But first: let me see. A rooster and a hen get together, and then the hen lays an “egg”? Nah, she produces a new chicken in the earliest stage of development. A cruel human performs an egg-abortion and prepares a breakfast, which contains 3 fried chickens - which are mistakenly considered to be fried eggs by the non-believers!

Are you even familiar with the process of chicken reproduction? Fertilization happens prior to egg laying; or it doesn’t. The result is either a chicken embryo in an egg, or an unfertilized egg (which isn’t a chicken). Typically, we eat unfertilized eggs. But hey… nice try.

A counter question: “Is there a difference between a fried chicken and some scrambled eggs?”

Neither are human. Both are food. (But, to the question, “yes”: one used to be a chicken and the other used to be an unfertilized egg.)

Do you have a soul-o-meter, which produces the actual evidence for this immortal “soul”?

Why do non-believers think that they’re making valid arguments when they ask for physical evidence of non-physical entities? Really… it’s tedious.

Not according to the church, which does not declare the moment of ensoulment. This applies to all respondents who mention the “soul”.

Not so fast. The Church teaches that “every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not ‘produced’ by the parents” (CCC, 366). Do you measure it with a stopwatch? Of course not. However, “The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the ‘form’ of the body: i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.” (CCC, 365)

So, a human is a human by virtue of the soul/body union. (Note that when a person dies, their body is no longer a ‘person’; it’s merely a ‘corpse’. No soul/body union at that point.)

And finally: “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.” (CCC, 2270)

So, as you can see, you’re simply mistaken. The Church does teach what you claim she does not.

But that does not account for “mutants”.

What do you mean by a ‘mutant’? Are you talking about a chimera?

And, of course it does not account for CLONES!

I’m embarrassed for you, Abrosz. Aren’t you the one who rails against believers for talking about things that don’t exist? And yet, when it suits you, you do precisely the same thing?

 

[jochoa]

I wish that y’all would not sweep the act of birth “under the rug”.

A human being changing locations doesn’t change the quality of being human.
When going from one “womb” to a different room, the human being is the same.