The science has been obscured in philosophy, but the question is settled.
© u3d/Shutterstock
The question of when a human life begins is a strictly scientific one and one for which the scientific community has had an empirical, internationally acknowledged answer for a very long time.
For more than a century, the field of human embryology has documented that in human sexual reproduction a new, whole, individual, living human being begins to exist at "first contact" between a sperm and an oocyte/"egg" (the beginning of the process known as fertilization.) Immediately when these two mere cells make first contact and fuse, organism proteins and enzymes specific to humans are produced. One new single-cell human
being with his or her own new, unique, and complete set of human DNA begins to exist. This is an internationally recognized empirical fact that has been documented by the Carnegie Stages of Early Human Embryonic Development since 1942, and updated every year since then to the present by the international nomenclature committee (FIPAT). The 23 Carnegie Stages cover human development during the eight-week embryonic period, and a new human being is represented by Carnegie Stage 1a.
The facts surrounding the beginning of a human life are muddled today largely because of the Supreme Court's reasoning in
Roe v. Wade. Justice Blackmun's majority opinion states that the beginning of human life could not be determined, because the "disciplines of medicine, philosophy and theology" were "unable to arrive at any consensus."
What Justice Blackmun failed to acknowledge is that none of the academic disciplines he mentioned have any bearing on the scientific issue of when a human life begins. Human embryology is the only scientific field that specializes in the fine details of human reproduction and empirically documents the stages a human embryo passes through between first contact and the fetal period. The landmark Supreme Court decision was made without the testimony of a single human embryologist.
What doctors, philosophers, and theologians may be qualified to address is the philosophical question of when a human person begins to exist. Personhood refers to a specific set of rights and protections generally accorded to human beings, but society has never reached a universal consensus that all human beings should receive these rights. The rights of personhood have historically been denied to various groups.
Justice Blackmun's opinion merged the biological with the philosophical. When a human person begins to exist is a philosophical issue. By contrast, when a human being begins to exist is a scientific issue.
Accurate science should be the starting point for resolving the philosophical question, not the reverse. As the philosophy dictum notes, "A small error in the beginning leads to a multitude of errors in the end."
Because the science has been obscured in philosophy for so long, many people today still believe that the scientific question is not settled.
Contend Projects seeks to reverse this deeply harmful trend. We are working to make the empirical, internationally acknowledged scientific fact of when a human being normally begins simple and accessible for everyone. Accurately informed decisions about human reproduction are relevant to everyone.
Reader Comments
Guessing, I'd say that Souled beings 'arrive' on a wavefront of intent whereas OPs' arrivals are a more 'mechanical' event.
And, we're talking here about linear time which I think both both barricades and confuses our thinking . . .
You've met them. Some you've met and they do indeed seem identical, soul on up.
Others, their only similarity is the bodyform they wear, and they're no more alike than any regular siblings you might encounter.
So, what's happening?
You get identical twins when a zygote splits, yes? So, assuming the split happens early, then two energising factors (souls) are required. But if it happens too far down the line? Then it will be the one soul now split in two. This could yield a why for all those stories about 'twins separated at birth who married A and owned B and went to C with D for F...'
What about chimerism? A chimera is when two zygotes merge into one. If this happens early, same as above, one energising factor. But if it happens later? Two souls sharing the same body?
Here's a novel thought for you. What happens if a zygote splits early, as though to generate distinct identical twins... and then recombines as a chimera?
We are all fragmented beings. We have one personality and set of motivations at work, one with our significant other, another with our mother, another with Uncle Bob, etc. However, normally one over-arching ego (sense of self) oversees them all. At times, we can experience possession - to be taken over by intentions other than our own. There are many disincarnate or demonic beings that live 'next door' to manifest reality, and that seek to test-drive human vehicles. They can displace you temporarily or even permanently if your ego is weak and/or you alter your consciousness (drugs, black magick, etc) enough. It's wise, therefore, to be very cautious about doing anything that might make this possible.
If two souls attempted to coexist in one person, the result would likely be insanity - an inability to manifest any coherent will or intention. If another being tried to 'take over' your intentions in any kind of an organized way, it would take advantage of a displaced or weakened ego in order to do it.
Although noting that "personhood refers to a specific set of rights and protections" this article incorrectly claims that "When a human person begins to exist is a philosophical issue" and claims that "many people today still believe that the scientific question is not settled."
The developmental state that comprises a "person" with rights requires a scientific basis for attribution of the specific capabilities of thinking and feeling that comprise any objective definition of a "person."