The question of self and conception

[Bahman]

I was thinking about this problem for a little while. We all know that we are the result of a pair of sperm and egg (at least biologically). We all know several million sperms are released at climax. We also know that two sperms could lead to two different person and as a result two different self and being. That means that I or you were very lucky to come here into this world. In another hand we all know that God does not role dice in creation so how one could explain this contradiction: the problem of the self and the role randomness in each self being, and the fact that God does not role dice. This also raises an important question about nobility of self.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

I was thinking about this problem for a little while. We all know that we are the result of a pair of sperm and egg (at least biologically). We all know several million sperms are released at climax. We also know that two sperms could lead to two different person and as a result two different self and being. That means that I or you were very lucky to come here into this world. In another hand we all know that God does not role dice in creation so how one could explain this contradiction: the problem of the self and the role randomness in each self being, and the fact that God does not role dice. This also raises an important question about nobility of self.

God has known us for all eternity. As Psalm 138 says, “…And my soul thou knowest full well, my frame was not hidden from thee, When I was fashioned in secret, and put together in the depthss of the earth, Thy eyes beheld my deeds, and all were written in thy book, while yet there was not one of them …”

We don’t know why God choose us out of thousands and out of hundreds of thousands because that is what it is you know. Clear back to Adam and Eve He has planned our birth. Imagine that!!! That is real Love. How much He must love us and what do we do with that love?

Only God can tell us how. Is it important? I don’t see how it could be.
Linus2nd

 

[DanAl]

I was thinking about this problem for a little while. We all know that we are the result of a pair of sperm and egg (at least biologically). We all know several million sperms are released at climax. We also know that two sperms could lead to two different person and as a result two different self and being. That means that I or you were very lucky to come here into this world. In another hand we all know that God does not role dice in creation so how one could explain this contradiction: the problem of the self and the role randomness in each self being, and the fact that God does not role dice. This also raises an important question about nobility of self.

The notion that we’re lucky or that exist by chance is metaphysical notion that goes beyond what is demonstrable by biology. There’s no inconsistency in saying that cases of apparent chance is God’s will guiding and sustaining nature.

 

[Bahman]

The notion that we’re lucky or that exist by chance is metaphysical notion that goes beyond what is demonstrable by biology. There’s no inconsistency in saying that cases of apparent chance is God’s will guiding and sustaining nature.

And where is the line between us and God then? If God’s intervention is to such a degree that it is guiding a sperm to join an egg and prevent others, then how I can claim that is me who moves my hand, leg, or decide about sexual relation with my spouse, etc?

We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. Moreover this also means that the self X which was the result of this conception was lucky and other self fate (Y) is absolutely unlucky and can never ever experience existence.

 

[DanAl]

And where is the line between us and God then? If God’s intervention is to such a degree that it is guiding a sperm to join an egg and prevent others, then how I can claim that is me who moves my hand, leg, or decide about sexual relation with my spouse, etc?

You’re assuming that our actions are determined. God is a concurrent cause of our volition and that is part of God’s plan. Free-will+ God’s plan= does not entail determinism.

We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. Moreover this also means that the self X which was the result of this conception was lucky and other self fate (Y) is absolutely unlucky and can never ever experience existence.

Again, you’re assuming that (metaphysical) chance or luck is a fact. A catholic will reject that out of hand.

 

[Bahman]

You’re assuming that our actions are determined. God is a concurrent cause of our volition and that is part of God’s plan. Free-will+ God’s plan= does not entail determinism.

I didn’t say that our actions are determined. You mentioned that God sustaining and guiding nature and I just ask a simple question that where is the line between us and God?

Again, you’re assuming that (metaphysical) chance or luck is a fact. A catholic will reject that out of hand.

By providing the example of lab I provide you an example that the factor of chance is removed from the problem and the person in the lab choose and pick up the sperm meaning that the self X is given the possibility to exist if sperm x is picked up. The self Y would be give the possibility to exit if other sperm y was picked up. So the question is what would happen for any of these two selves if other self is given the possibility to exist.

 

[White_Tree]

I was thinking about this problem for a little while. We all know that we are the result of a pair of sperm and egg (at least biologically). We all know several million sperms are released at climax. We also know that two sperms could lead to two different person and as a result two different self and being. That means that I or you were very lucky to come here into this world. In another hand we all know that God does not role dice in creation so how one could explain this contradiction: the problem of the self and the role randomness in each self being, and the fact that God does not role dice. This also raises an important question about nobility of self.

Here’s a question. If, perchance, it was a different sperm that fertilized that egg, and thus a different body with different DNA arose out of that conception, who would that person be? And where would you be? Would you exist at all?

To avoid being vague, this is what I’m getting at with those questions: You seem to be equating your being/soul and your physical body. I’m not sure those two are equivalent.

Also, as far as I know, the idea that “God does not roll dice” traces back to Einstein in his rejection of quantum mechanics. It’s not a “law of nature” per se.

 

[Bahman]

Here’s a question. If, perchance, it was a different sperm that fertilized that egg, and thus a different body with different DNA arose out of that conception, who would that person be? And where would you be? Would you exist at all?

To avoid being vague, this is what I’m getting at with those questions: You seem to be equating your being/soul and your physical body. I’m not sure those two are equivalent.

Also, as far as I know, the idea that “God does not roll dice” traces back to Einstein in his rejection of quantum mechanics. It’s not a “law of nature” per se.

We have no logical proof whether I could ever exist if another sperm fertilized the egg as I would not exist if my parent haven’t have sex with each other or no sperm had the chance to fertilize the egg. We know this, in case of twin children that two different eggs give rise to two different persons with completely different personalities which means biological factors are important for what we are.

I have no idea how self (or soul in your point of view) take forms in the time of conception and afterwards. Assume that the result of conception lead to a person who has serious mental illness, then there was no me who sits in front of computer and discuss different issues with you. I mean my being partially depends on my biology.

 

[DanAl]

**I didn’t say that our actions are determined. **You mentioned that God sustaining and guiding nature and I just ask a simple question that where is the line between us and God?

You clearly implied if there are no lines between God and us then our actions are determined and the rest of your post goes in those lines (“how I can claim that is me who moves my hand, leg, or decide about sexual relation with my spouse, etc?.” ) If that’s not what you have in mind, what are you getting at?

By providing the example of lab I provide you an example that the factor of chance is removed from the problem and the person in the lab choose and pick up the sperm meaning that the self X is given the possibility to exist if sperm x is picked up. The self Y would be give the possibility to exit if other sperm y was picked up. So the question is what would happen for any of these two selves if other self is given the possibility to exist.

You didn’t say anything about the bolded part in the previous post.

We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. Moreover this also means that the self X which was the result of this conception was lucky and other self fate (Y) is absolutely unlucky and can never ever experience existence.

You’re clearly speaking that God chose X and not why Y. One was lucky and the other unlucky. You’re not asking “what would happen for any of these two selves if other self is given the possibility to exist.” Please, make up your mind, be clear and stick to your point. I will not waste my time in schizophrenic conversations.

 

[Bahman]

You clearly implied if there are no lines between God and us then our actions are determined and the rest of your post goes in those lines (“how I can claim that is me who moves my hand, leg, or decide about sexual relation with my spouse, etc?.” ) If that’s not what you have in mind, what are you getting at?

That was you who mentioned “There’s no inconsistency in saying that cases of apparent chance is God’s will guiding and sustaining nature.” Then I mentioned where is the line between us and God. My question is in fact very plain and simple from starting: if several million of sperms are released during climax and each of them have the chance to form different self then what is happening for other selves since only one out of million have the chance to fertilize the egg?

You didn’t say anything about the bolded part in the previous post.

I think that was a misunderstanding and it is now clear.

You’re clearly speaking that God chose X and not why Y. One was lucky and the other unlucky. You’re not asking “what would happen for any of these two selves if other self is given the possibility to exist.” Please, make up your mind, be clear and stick to your point. I will not waste my time in schizophrenic conversations.

First by luck I didn’t mean the literal luck. Please accept my apology if that cause any confusion. My point from starting as you stated was “what would happen for any of these two selves if other self is given the possibility to exist?”.

 

[tonyrey]

The circumstances of conception have nothing whatsoever to do with the soul.

 

[Bahman]

The circumstances of conception have nothing whatsoever to do with the soul.

Then when we start to own the quality of self?

 

[fhansen]

And where is the line between us and God then? If God’s intervention is to such a degree that it is guiding a sperm to join an egg and prevent others, then how I can claim that is me who moves my hand, leg, or decide about sexual relation with my spouse, etc?

We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. Moreover this also means that the self X which was the result of this conception was lucky and other self fate (Y) is absolutely unlucky and can never ever experience existence.

Because God doesn’t exist in time, all " moments" are immediate to Him. In our dimension, randomness, associated with time, occurs, and appears to be relevant. In His dimension of eternity, all knowledge is grasped without regard to time. He knew you before you we’re born, as He knew all events “before” they happened in our timeframe.

 

[Bahman]

Because God doesn’t exist in time, all " moments" are immediate to Him. In our dimension, randomness, associated with time, occurs, and appears to be relevant. In His dimension of eternity, all knowledge is grasped without regard to time. He knew you before you we’re born, as He knew all events “before” they happened in our timeframe.

Please read post 118 in the following thread forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=816807&page=8.

You also neither answer my question (Where is the line between us and God?) nor explain what is wrong with my thought experiment: We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. This gives rise to an important question about nobility of self.

 

[fhansen]

Please read post 118 in the following thread forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=816807&page=8.

You also neither answer my question (Where is the line between us and God?) nor explain what is wrong with my thought experiment: We also know that we can mix sperm and egg in lab. So following the previous argument, that is not physician who choose sperm x instead of y and that is God since otherwise we could have other person, other being, other self. This gives rise to an important question about nobility of self.

Nobility of self, or the dignity of a human being, is determined by God’s opinion of us, who we are as creation’s of His-what His purpose is in creating us. And regardless of how conception takes place, man is still only a procreator, while God is the creator.

 

[Bahman]

Nobility of self, or the dignity of a human being, is determined by God’s opinion of us, who we are as creation’s of His-what His purpose is in creating us. And regardless of how conception takes place, man is still only a procreator, while God is the creator.

Here is my key question from you: How the self/soul could be noble if its existence could be questioned with such a simple thought experiment? What we become afterwards is subject of other discussion.

 

[Alindawyl]

Here is my key question from you: How the self/soul could be noble if its existence could be questioned with such a simple thought experiment? What we become afterwards is subject of other discussion.

Who we are has to do with our identity. The nobility of the self, the dignity of the human person, has nothing to do with our identity (our WHO). It derives from our nature as human beings created in the image and likeness of God (our WHAT).

All human beings, regardless of WHO they are, are deserving of dignity and respect because all human beings have the same nature (the same WHAT).

 

[tonyrey]

Then when we start to own the quality of self?

The self begins to exist at the moment of conception but there is no scientific explanation for its attributes: consciousness, personality, the power of reason, conscience or free will.

 

[fhansen]

Here is my key question from you: How the self/soul could be noble if its existence could be questioned with such a simple thought experiment? What we become afterwards is subject of other discussion.

I didn’t see where the existence of the soul had been questioned. There are way too many unanswered questions about life-how it occurs at all, what happens to the source of animation in a body that dies, let alone questions about the nature of the mind and personality-to think we have any conclusive scientific reason to presume that the self/soul is temporary.

 

[tonyrey]

Who we are has to do with our identity. The nobility of the self, the dignity of the human person, has nothing to do with our identity (our WHO). It derives from our nature as human beings created in the image and likeness of God (our WHAT).

All human beings, regardless of WHO they are, are deserving of dignity and respect because all human beings have the same nature (the same WHAT).

Nobility of character has nothing to do with heredity. Human titles are amoral!