What makes someone human?

[TerminalGodhead]

Sarcasm aside, the question needs to be asked in order to settle quite a lot of issues.

The first question in determining what a human being is, is to first find out what fundamental trait makes someone human. Well, a human is mortal, yet, you can't classify anything that is mortal as human. For instance, a rat is mortal, therefore a rat is human is inherently false. The proper logic would be, I am a human, therefore I am mortal. Yet, that doesn't answer the question, 'what makes someone human,' as that logic relies on the presumption of humanity.

I would say that the trait that makes humans, well, humans would have to be something intangible, or ineffable, or something so obvious that it would make every bit of anyone untouchable. That obvious thing being DNA. DNA, is the only thing that every human being shares with each other, therefore it is the only pre-requisite to being human.

A zygote has the DNA that makes it human, therefore, a zygote is human.






























Weeeeeeellllll, s**t. I was not after that conclusion. ******** logic, do what I want. mad

[Captain_Shinzo]

The problem with trying to find a proper definition to a term to gain an answer to an argument is simply that proper definitions do not always succeed in winning an argument.

Case in point, the thread earlier that was arguing the definitions of "natural" and "nature" to determine if homosexuality is natural or not.

Anyway, a human is just a type of species. A zygote has the potential to be an adult human, but I am not entirely sure if the category "human" is specific enough.

I see where you are getting at, though, as many have been trying to bring that up earlier in the prolife and prochoice threads. I think the real reason it is a common point is to argue if intelligence decides specific rights given to something.

" If it isn't a human adult, it is pretty much an animal and doesn't have the same exact rights as humans. "

I don't believe that is entirely true as animals also have rights. Actually, anything that is promising to live should have some form of right or another. I think it falls more in line with how much self-awareness and intelligence along with the role in nature something has in order to decide how much rights it deserves.

[CuAnnan]

Are you looking for a universally accepted metric for human-ness?

[washu_2004]

Captain_Shinzo

" If it isn't a human adult, of the right sexuality, ethnicity and religion it is pretty much an animal and doesn't have the same exact rights as humans. "

(red text added by me)

In practice this is what usually happens...

[Seraphor]

A Zygote is human, just like my pinkie, or the osteochondroma I had hacked off my right femur four weeks ago. All three examples share a common trait, human DNA.

Now, what defines a person? Because that what matters when it comes to individual rights and wellbeing.

[TerminalGodhead]

CuAnnan

Are you looking for a universally accepted metric for human-ness?

Essentially, yes.

[village midget]

TerminalGodhead

Weeeeeeellllll, s**t. I was not after that conclusion. ******** logic, do what I want. mad

What makes an elephant an elephant?

I think you are maybe more concerned with the concept of personhood? A zygote is human but it is not a human until it can potentially survive autonomously.

[hahahalolwutccl]

A human is a creature capable of recognising its own existence.

Babies, for instance, are not human.

[CuAnnan]

hahahalolwutccl

A human is a creature capable of recognising its own existence.

Babies, for instance, are not human.

Without descending to Bene Gesserit levels of Gom Jabbar enforce Nerve Induction boxes; how, precisely, do we test whether or not something is capable of recognising its own existance?
Many animals pass, for example, the mirror test.
Lions have been shown to remember individual humans and express emotion for them.
Dolphins and Whales have names.
So, by what means do we exclude or, more importantly, include sentients?

[hahahalolwutccl]

CuAnnan

hahahalolwutccl

A human is a creature capable of recognising its own existence.

Babies, for instance, are not human.

Without descending to Bene Gesserit levels of Gom Jabbar enforce Nerve Induction boxes; how, precisely, do we test whether or not something is capable of recognising its own existance?
Many animals pass, for example, the mirror test.
Lions have been shown to remember individual humans and express emotion for them.
Dolphins and Whales have names.
So, by what means do we exclude or, more importantly, include sentients?

Plants are sentient. Do you mean sapient?

I'm perfectly happy with making it illegal to mistreat animals which are likely to be cognizant of their own existence.

[God-The-RapistV2.0]

1. You must be a living Hominid.

2. No that's it.

[TerminalGodhead]

village midget

TerminalGodhead

Weeeeeeellllll, s**t. I was not after that conclusion. ******** logic, do what I want. mad

What makes an elephant an elephant?

I think you are maybe more concerned with the concept of personhood? A zygote is human but it is not a human until it can potentially survive autonomously.

Then, you discredit anyone who is uncapable of surviving autonomously, such as the handicapped, from being human. Since they are obviously human, your logic does not stand.

[Ask Jappleack]

Hm, perhaps what makes a human is ability, thought, action, functionality, being a part of human culture or society.
If our genes were us, then our skin cells that die would need funerals lol.

But then that definition would discriminate 'non-functional' humans.

[CuAnnan]

hahahalolwutccl

Plants are sentient. Do you mean sapient?

Well that would all depend on what you mean by "sentient", wouldn't it.
It should be clear, from context, that I meant the capacity to perceive subjectivity or qualia.
While a little nebulous a definition, it is certainly contextually better a definition than "the ability to sense".
If we use sapience to determine humanity then vast majorities, mayhaps entire nations, fail to meet the criteria.

What I'm trying to drive at is that there cannot be such a definition.

[GunsmithKitten]

When the Bene Gesserit declare you human by passing their tests.