[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
A zygote is not a human…or is it?
[/quote]
Is it a frog? Is there something confusing about it’s human DNA?
[/quote]
Maybe it’s human batter, but is not yet a human?
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?
[quote]zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
Organism = life
Human zygote = Human organism = Human life
Hence, why I framed the discussion to reflect as much.
Oh, borrowed the definition from none other than…Planned Parenthood.
zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?[/quote]
If not, then maybe you can’t call yourself a member of the species homo sapiens either? Maybe your skin is the wrong color or you’re a dwarf because you weren’t baked right into a human?
Homo sapiens = human. It’s that simple.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
A zygote is not a human…or is it?
[/quote]
Is it a frog? Is there something confusing about it’s human DNA?
[/quote]
Maybe it’s human batter, but is not yet a human?[/quote]
…
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?[/quote]
Let me see if understand what you’re attempting to do. You’re trying to draw an analogy to the growth and development of an already existing life to the making of a…cake? I haven’t somehow horribly misunderstood you?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?[/quote]
Let me see if understand what you’re attempting to do. You’re trying to draw an analogy to the growth and development of an already existing life to the making of a…cake? I haven’t somehow horribly misunderstood you?[/quote]
So, is a baby, just toddler batter? Is a middle age adult an ingredient of an old man?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
Organism = life
Human zygote = Human organism = Human life
Hence, why I framed the discussion to reflect as much.
Oh, borrowed the definition from none other than…Planned Parenthood.
zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
There’s no question that it has human DNA, but is it human batter or a human? In the same vein, we call it cake batter as opposed to pancake batter or beer batter, but it’s not a cake.
Maybe in order to be “a human”, you must reach a certain point in the baking process; otherwise you’re just batter.
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
Organism = life
Human zygote = Human organism = Human life
Hence, why I framed the discussion to reflect as much.
Oh, borrowed the definition from none other than…Planned Parenthood.
zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
There’s no question that it has human DNA, but is it human batter or a human? In the same vein, we call it cake batter as opposed to pancake batter or beer batter, but it’s not a cake.
Maybe in order to be “a human”, you must reach a certain point in the baking process; otherwise you’re just batter.
[/quote]
Except that being human is a continual process. There is no end product. Development occurs throughout.
It is a terrible analogy.
yep, it can only be called human if it has reached the “white” level of racial development,the “anglo-saxon” level of cultural development, the “protestant” level of spiritual development and the “heterosexual” level of psychosexual development.
if it has not reached these levels of development, it’s basically a pre-human. Therefore it can (and in some circumstances it must) be killed.
More seriously…
if “human” is not the name of a biological specie but some kind of “special status”, you can bet this status will be restricted and restricted again to create more subcategories of “not yet human” and “no more human”.
and that’s not “just semantics”.
historically, denying the humanity of others has always be the first step which led to the worst (yet most banal) of evils.
[quote]kamui wrote:
yep, it can only be called human if it has reached the “white” level of racial development,the “anglo-saxon” level of cultural development and the “protestant” level of spiritual development.
if it has not reached these levels of development, it’s basically a pre-human. Therefore it can (and in some circumstances it must) be killed.
More seriously…
if “human” is not the name of a biological specie but some kind of “special status”, you can bet this status will be restricted and restricted again to create more subcategories of “not yet human” and “no more human”.
and that’s not “just semantics”.
historically, denying thehumanity of others has always be the first step which led to the worst (yet most banal) of evils.
[/quote]
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
So, is a baby, just toddler batter? Is a middle age adult an ingredient of an old man?[/quote]
Heh.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?[/quote]
If not, then maybe you can’t call yourself a member of the species homo sapiens either? Maybe your skin is the wrong color or you’re a dwarf because you weren’t baked right into a human?
Homo sapiens = human. It’s that simple.[/quote]
Human DNA that has been “baked” results in a human, regardless of the specific coding of the DNA for skin color, height, etc. The question isn’t about the actual coding, but about how far along you need to be in the baking process for it to be considered a cake rather than batter.
[quote]kamui wrote:
yep, it can only be called human if it has reached the “white” level of racial development,the “anglo-saxon” level of cultural development, the “protestant” level of spiritual development and the “heterosexual” level of psychosexual development.
if it has not reached these levels of development, it’s basically a pre-human. Therefore it can (and in some circumstances it must) be killed.
More seriously…
if “human” is not the name of a biological specie but some kind of “special status”, you can bet this status will be restricted and restricted again to create more subcategories of “not yet human” and “no more human”.
and that’s not “just semantics”.
historically, denying thehumanity of others has always be the first step which led to the worst (yet most banal) of evils.
[/quote]
Nice post.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Except that being human is a continual process. There is no end product. Development occurs throughout.
[/quote]
This!
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
It’s a living organism, but is it properly called a human? That’s the question posed by the cake analogy.[/quote]
Are you implying we can’t answer this with a bio 101 understanding of DNA and testing? You’re not suggesting it’s an entirely different individual organism, say a dog, that “POOF” turns into an organism with humanity’s ID tag written all over it, are you? I mean, you can’t really believe you replaced some foreign placeholder organism at some point, do you? You’re still within the same life cycle of that same organism, no? You are that organism, no?[/quote]
I’m suggesting that some things can become other things by virtue of maturation, despite having the same ingredients. Cake batter is not a cake. A zygote is not a human…or is it?
I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.[/quote]
It’s not an ingredient. DNA is digital information. The very definition of species means two humans can only produce another human organism.
[/quote]
It’s an ingredient, and a cookbook. But it isn’t baked yet, so can you call it a cake?[/quote]
If not, then maybe you can’t call yourself a member of the species homo sapiens either? Maybe your skin is the wrong color or you’re a dwarf because you weren’t baked right into a human?
Homo sapiens = human. It’s that simple.[/quote]
Human DNA that has been “baked” results in a human, regardless of the specific coding of the DNA for skin color, height, etc. The question isn’t about the actual coding, but about how far along you need to be in the baking process for it to be considered a cake rather than batter.[/quote]
Life is a process, not a result. If you are determined to tie it into the world of pastry, compare it to making a cake, NOT the result of making a cake. Being in the process of making a cake would be life. At the dough stage, you are in fact making a cake.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
No, it’s not killing a person.[/quote]
Is it because your saying it’s not a human being? Then what kind of organism is it if not a human one?
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
Organism = life
Human zygote = Human organism = Human life
Hence, why I framed the discussion to reflect as much.
Oh, borrowed the definition from none other than…Planned Parenthood.
zygote
The single-celled organism that results from the joining of the egg and sperm.[/quote]
There’s no question that it has human DNA…
[/quote]
If there’s no question that it’s human DNA, and no question that an organism is by definition living, then we can identify the life in question as human. Human life. You can’t keep acknowledging these things with making the connection, forlife. After awhile it looks deliberate.
So, to recap, you agree that science knows the difference between a frog zygote and a human zygote.
You agree that a zygote is an organism.
You agree that that an organism is living. Life.
You then must realize that human zygote = human organism.
Human organism = human life.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
No, it’s not killing a person.[/quote]
Is it because your saying it’s not a human being? Then what kind of organism is it if not a human one?
[/quote]
A coma patient with fluid instead of brains is still a human being, but i wouldn’t call it a person.
Without a functioning brain a human being is just a sack of flesh, bones and fluids. A zygote is a tiny satchel of flesh, bones and fluids but without a properly functioning brain.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
So, is a baby, just toddler batter? Is a middle age adult an ingredient of an old man?[/quote]
Heh. [/quote]
It’s actually a good point 
But I think the analogy still holds. At some point in the baking process, it stops being batter and becomes a cake. It still isn’t fully baked, but it is properly called a cake rather than cake batter. It transitions from batter to cake, then goes through different cake stages (underdone, moist, dry, burned ;). I’m just about to the burned stage myself.
I guess the real question is whether or not the batter has inherent rights, by virtue of being batter instead of a cake. Why should something have more rights just because it’s further along in the baking process?
I guess you could argue that it qualitatively changes during baking, and becomes something altogether different. It has the identical ingredients as the batter, but it is still qualitatively different.