Identity and necessity.: Philosophy Forums

Identity and necessity.

ray_s
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 01, 2007
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 33

Posted 04/13/07 - 11:44 AM: Subject: Identity and necessity.	#1
I believe that it happened in Canada that a woman had carnal knowledge of two men on the same day, and subsequently became pregnant. A DNA test to determine the father was unsuccessful because the two men involved were identical twins. Clearly, one man is the father of the child, the other is not. Having "father" DNA, or sharing DNA, is not enough. Sharing DNA is neither sufficient nor necessary for one person to be related to another. Suppose that a DNA test reveals that John is the father of Jack. But what makes John the father of Jack is the fact that sperm that was created in John's body fertilised the egg that eventually became Jack. What makes Jack the brother of Jill is the fact that the sperm involved in their separate creation came from the same place, and similarly the eggs came from the same place.

jaoman
On the Road...

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 13, 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 1346

Posted 04/13/07 - 04:21 PM:	#2
One could take that one step further and say that what makes John the father of Jack is the fact that John has acted as a male role model for Jack... thus, connecting familial identity with relationships. That would be just as valid. More valid, I think, for Jack who wants a father. And probably less so for John who wants to propagate his seed. The categories we choose to use often reflect our priorities. The DNA category, like all categories, represents a tool. In this case, it might not be as useful as always. However, if both men have identical DNA, then in a strictly biological sense each is the father of the others children. From here we can just tack on categories until we get a whole. There's nothing to prevent us from saying that the father is the one that takes on the relationship.
"With no relation to class or social background, whether it suits them or not, people yearn for a dream. Sustained by a dream, hurt by a dream, revived by a dream, killed by a dream. And even after being abandoned by a dream, it continues to smolder from the bottom of one's heart... probably until the verge of death. A man should envision such a lifetime once. A life spent as a martyr to the god named "dream." - Kentaro Miura

ray_s
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 01, 2007
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 33

Posted 04/15/07 - 06:13 AM:	#3
I am talking about biological father. If the child starts calling someone other than his biological father "daddy" then he is either wrong, or else (more likely) using the word with another meaning. I don't think that a judge and jury would agree with you that I would be the biological father of a child fathered (biologically) by my identical twin - if I had one. Any more than my fitting the description of a burglar (say carried out by identical twin) makes me guilty of a burglary.

Megalopsuchos
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 09, 2007
Location: Portland
Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 122

Posted 04/15/07 - 07:27 PM:	#4
What's so bad about over-determination? Why can't the baby have two sufficient causes? Ha, ha. For example, suppose you had one light, with two light switches. Independently, flipping either light switch is a sufficient cause for the light turning on. Suppose two people each flipped one of the light switches at exactly the same time. If someone only witnessed the light turning on, he/she would probably conclude that one of the light switches was flipped. It would be absurd to assume that there are two causes for the light turning on. But, it is not metaphysically incoherent to imagine two causes. Over-determination is at least nomologically possible because it is metaphysically coherent. Thus, over-determination is metaphysically unattractive only because it is not parsimonious.

Floyd
Cool

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Dec 16, 2003
Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 1964

Posted 04/16/07 - 06:18 AM:	#5
Who cares who the so-called "biological father" is? I thought there were tests to tell even between twins. If not, I bet there will be one someday. Either way, one of the two men's sperm fertilized the egg. Who cares which one?
Short and to the point. \| Online Philosophy Club \| Book & Reading Forums \| My Philosophy Articles "Only the descent into the hell of self-knowledge can pave the way to godliness." ~Immanuel Kant

Reformed Nihilist
Oblong

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Jul 15, 2004
Location: The mighty fortress of the north
Total Topics: 68
Total Posts: 7929

Posted 04/16/07 - 06:30 AM:	#6
So ray, are you asking about who should legally have the financial responsibility for the child (paternity suits and the like), are you asking who "metaphysically" or "ontologically" is the biological father, or are you asking something else? Legally, I think that if both men had sex with the woman and we are scientifically unable to determine who's sperm did the actual impregnation, then I don't actually see a problem with making both men legally responsible or having them share legal responsability for paternity of the child. In that sense, legally they would both be the biological father. Metaphysically/ontologically? The one who's sperm actually impregnated the woman. That's it. End of discussioon. Unless you want to talk about the fact that we simply have difficulties making determinations with any level of confidence from time to time. Some time we just don't know stuff, and then we have to proceed with the understanding that we don't know, and make the best descisions we can given our ignorance.
Nobody ever became a famous philosopher by being a champion of ecumenical hybridism Daniel Dennett Freedom Evolves

You don't have permission to post.