There are situations in which doubt is a type of certainty. For example, if the subject is in doubt whether or not to get married one day before the wedding, this doubt is a strong indication that he should not get married. If the subject is in doubt whether or not he loves a person, it is because, at least at that moment, he does not yet love, since love is a firm decision. There are situations where "I don't know" is a no. The case of abortion must be included here.
There is no scientific consensus on the emergence of human life. If there is no consensus, there is doubt. Since there is doubt whether or not the fetus is human life in the scientific community, there is a 50% chance that it is human life, according to the scientific debate itself. Therefore, no one in their right mind would do something that "may" kill a person.
If they give you a drink and say: "you have a 50% chance of dying if you drink it", would you drink it? This argument is what I call the "skeptical argument" and it is quite strong, as it morally obliges even those who are on the fence to take a stand. When it comes to human life, the wall is not an option.
2 . The argument of personal identity
This argument is superior to the previous one, as it touches on metaphysical issues. Human life is a continuous process that, to be defined as such, does not depend on stages and apexes. The life of a 30-year-old man at the peak of his physical and mental fitness is no more life than the life of a 3-month-old baby. Just as the life of a 3-month-old baby is no more life than the life of a 3-month-old fetus which, in turn, is no more life than the life of a 3-week-old fetus. Living condition does not define life.
There is no stage where human life reaches its peak. There is only a single stage that has its initial burst in conception and its end in death. Personal identity is not acquired with an ID or a birth certificate. Personal identity is acquired the moment a person comes out of nothing and comes into existence.
Whether it is the human existence of the king of England or the existence of a 20-day embryo in the womb of a woman from an underdeveloped country, it is the existence of a human person in the same way. Existence is the only truly democratic thing, as it makes queens and faminshed people participate in the same category.
3. Being is previous to knowing
The most widespread thesis among those who are in favor of abortion is that the fetus should be considered "human life" only when the central nervous system is formed, there around 3 months. The error in this definition lies in the submission of being to knowledge - a basic metaphysical error. For someone to know, they must first exist.
Having knowledge or having brain activity in perfect formation is not enough to define someone as a "human being", if that were the case, people with dementia or with compromised mental activity would be less human than a mentally healthy person.
Today, you should no longer call a "person WITH a disability" a "disabled person", and I completely agree! After all, disability happens IN THE PERSON, but IT IS NOT THE PERSON!
Likewise, the faculty of knowing and mental/brain activities occur in the person's BEING, but they are not essential criteria to define this being. Thus, a 30-day-old embryo has as much being as an astrophysics genius. Let us not exchange the tree of life for the tree of knowledge again!
izzy806
tangentwithtanner
prguitarman
ellievsbear
snowghoul
