Philosophy Forums


Is an anacelphic baby a person?

PrintPrint


Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Is an anacelphic baby a person?
jsidelko
Assistant Professor
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 08, 2009

Total Topics: 30
Total Posts: 277
Posted 09/23/09 - 10:49 AM:
Subject: Is an anacelphalic baby a person?
quote post
#1
Is an Anacephalic baby a person?

Anacephalic babies are born with out a cerebral cortex and, consequently, are lacking in any conscious awareness or potential for becoming conscious persons. Healthy human embryos are also non-conscious but, unlike the Anacephalic baby, they possess the potential for conscious personhood. Assuming that actual or potential consciousness are a criterion for personhood, my questions are this: Does a being with the potential for personhood have greater ontological status than a being without such potential? Is an anacephalic baby a person? Is the killing of the healthy unborn ethically less justified than the killing of postpartum Anacephalic babies? Or are they both unethical?

Edited by jsidelko on 09/23/09 - 05:42 PM. Reason: spelling

thanatos
mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509
Posted 09/23/09 - 03:08 PM:
quote post
#2

I would say they are both ethical. Primarily because it is not until a toddlers age that a "person" becomes self aware.

Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.
jsidelko
Assistant Professor
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 08, 2009

Total Topics: 30
Total Posts: 277
Posted 09/23/09 - 05:40 PM:
quote post
#3
mway
I would say they are both ethical. Primarily because it is not until a toddlers age that a "person" becomes self aware.


Are you suggesting that a pre- toddler or a profoundly retarded adult with a"mental age"of less than two years may be candidates for euthansia?

thanatos
mway
Professor

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 07, 2009

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 509
Posted 09/24/09 - 04:14 PM:
quote post
#4
jsidelko wrote:
mway
I would say they are both ethical. Primarily because it is not until a toddlers age that a "person" becomes self aware.


Are you suggesting that a pre- toddler or a profoundly retarded adult with a"mental age"of less than two years may be candidates for euthansia?

Definately. Human beings are just biological machines, and euthanasing ones without definably human abilities is the same as turning off a toaster (you could argue all humans, but i'll leave that for another thread).

Lame is to Wav, as the Brain is to Reality.
Hamandcheese
Ham of state
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 05, 2007
Location: Canada

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 128
Posted 09/24/09 - 04:44 PM:
quote post
#5
The 'potential baby' argument holds no moral sway for me. It seems more like a pro-lifer rationalization to be more coherent with modern materialist explanations for consciousness and the soul. So for me whether the thing is definitively brain-less or just presently brain-less I don't make much distinction.

theham88@gmail.com
linear_occurance
Graduate
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 10, 2009
Location: Palmer, AK, USA

Total Topics: 9
Total Posts: 129
Posted 09/24/09 - 05:39 PM:
quote post
#6
I would say that you could have more of an argument for a potential person, than a lump of permanently braindead cells.

But I would think that until the child in question becomes a "person" (my deffinition is self-aware), you have not killed a "person" through abortion. You have, as mway put it, unplugged a toaster.

Thus making it ethical, in my book.
180 Proof
kynic
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Apr 27, 2003
Location: NOTHINGlifeNOTHING

Total Topics: 84
Total Posts: 5135
1 of 1 people found this post helpful
Posted 09/24/09 - 08:07 PM:
quote post
#7
jsidelko wrote:
Does a being with the potential for personhood have greater ontological status than a being without such potential?

No.

Is an anacephalic baby a person?

No.

Is the killing of the healthy unborn ethically less justified than the killing of postpartum Anacephalic babies?

So long as this "healthy unborn" is younger than 26 weeks old (by when thalamocortical connections are established) then No is the answer.

Or are they both unethical?

No.

The question isn't "Which explanations do I believe?" but rather "Which explanations do I least disbelieve?"

Absence of evidence THAT MUST BE THERE (i.e. implied by any claim, concept, or (its) predicates, that affects changes in/to the world) entails evidence of absence.

[What cannot be done?[What cannot be hoped?[What cannot be known?]]]
Wosret
Tetsugaku no mongaikan
Avatar

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 29, 2007
Location: Nova Scotia Canada

Total Topics: 14
Total Posts: 2876
Posted 09/26/09 - 12:49 AM:
quote post
#8
Philosophically a person is a "self-conscious or rational being", which no infant is, let alone one without a cerebral cortex.

"If you've got any last words, say 'em now." - Nadie.

"I am Horo the Wise." - Horo the Wise.


Aceedwin
Default Rank Rejecter
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 22, 2009
Location: The universe. Possibly.

Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 121
Posted 09/26/09 - 12:55 AM:
quote post
#9
"The baby's a carrot?" That should be in some kind of comedic act, regardless of the political incorrectness.

I reckon it's no more morally condemnable that cutting down a tree, or using weed killer. Sometimes frowned upon, but only by strange hippy-types.

Some people enjoy finding answers, but I dislike losing questions.
jsidelko
Assistant Professor
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 08, 2009

Total Topics: 30
Total Posts: 277
Posted 09/27/09 - 09:07 AM:
quote post
#10
Institutions around the world contain a number of mentally retarded adults with profound deficiencies in intellectual ability. Their functioning is so low they are at the level of one year old infants or less. Should they be candidates for euthanasia and should their healthy organs be harvested? Initially the T4 Euthanasia Program in Nazi Germany started with the lowest functioning people and gradually worked up to borderline retarded and the intellectually average mentally ill populations. Since the definition of personhood is ambiguous, I can see the practice of involuntary euthanasia leading to a slippery slope. Can any government be trusted to regulate such a program?

thanatos
Download thread as

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6



Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.