Bioethics in ESC Research And What Is A Soul

[CraigD]

In addition, most in vitro fertilized eggs are not used, to be discarded as waste.

True, and one of the more perplexing aspects of the “right to life” political faction’s objection to the use of excess IVF eggs for stem cell research.

 

Typically, after IVF patient/clients have successfully had the child or children they desire, the remaining harvested eggs are destroyed as medical waste, or stored frozen until they are no longer capable of being fertilized and implanted. Sensibly, there is little or no popular objection to this practice. There is, however, considerable objection to using them for research, and potentially therapeutic, purposes.

 

This parallels objections that some people and cultures, both ancient and modern, have had to the use of cadavers for medical research or organ transplants. The issue appears to be not really about allowing a fertilized egg to develop into a live infant, but about following appropriate traditions concerning disposing of human remains.

[Zythryn]

I am confused by the self contradiction of these two statements.

 

My apologies Freethinker, I was not clear.

 

My personal beliefs lie with the second statement of mine. I don't believe there exists any non-physical aspect of a person.

 

What I was attempting to do was to create a position from each standpoint. As I don't believe the concept of a soul has any scientific evidence, I moved to philosophy for the first statement. The second statement was a scientific viewpoint.

 

I find it helpful to try to see both sides especially in arguments such as this.

 

 

CraigD, excellent analysis. I have always been surprised at the lack of critisism of the IVF clinic by the people who oppose using embryos that are being destroyed anyway. If they stopped the IVF clinics the main source of embryos would go away and their stance would not seem quite so hypocritical.

[Freethinker]

CraigD, excellent analysis. I have always been surprised at the lack of critisism of the IVF clinic by the people who oppose using embryos that are being destroyed anyway. If they stopped the IVF clinics the main source of embryos would go away and their stance would not seem quite so hypocritical.

The problem with trying to understand the reasoning behind the opposition is that it is not a REASONED arguement. It is an irrational religious personal POV. It fails to stand up to even simple review of internal self contradiction. But that never stops the true beleiver from grasping tighly to whatever nonsense they get stuck in their heads. Or perhaps more correctly, what some authoritarian figurehead has forced into their tiny little crainiums.

[leuv21]

anyone has read about near-death experience (NDE) or seen someone who has just come out of it??

could anyone help me with the soul subject?? Is nde connected to all o this?? Is it something real?

[InfiniteNow]

anyone has read about near-death experience (NDE) or seen someone who has just come out of it??

could anyone help me with the soul subject?? Is nde connected to all o this?? Is it something real?

Hey leuv21,

 

These questions are not really on point with the rest of the thread. However, they are interesting questions. In the interim, you might try here:

 

http://hypography.com/forums/search.php

[CraigD]

anyone has read about near-death experience (NDE) or seen someone who has just come out of it??

Having worked in a medicine for most of my adult life, I can answer “yes” to both questions. Over 20 years ago, I attempted an experiment to test the objective reality of a particular kind of NDE, the out-of-body experience (OBE), which I described in 67157 in last year’s “Do Flatliner’s Exist?”

 

InfiniteNow is correct that this is off-topic for the current thread, and should be started in another. You may want to first read about it on hypograpy and the larger internet first, as it’s been written about quite a bit.

[Fatstep]

The soul is definitely not something that science has proves the existence or even strongly hinted at till date.

 

It is probably the outcome of the refusal of the people to believe that their observation power, intellegence and mindset can stem from a thing as mundane and normal as a brain made of solid matter.

It is difficult to accept that the seemingly enormous mental realm is nothing more than nervous impulses and chemical signals, all regulated by things that are totally mechanical.

 

Then, ethics stems from an inbuilt and instinctive love for the individuals of one's own species. Trouble occurs when people attempt to convert this extremely versatile and constantly changing concept into something of a more fixed nature.

 

Life, is another very versatile concept, and the members here have knocked their heads over it at times. Before yo continue, do check the article that summarises the discussion that had taked here earlier. It was a more 'pure' biology oriented one, and you might want to continue the discussion on this thread.

 

Do you wish for the title of the thread to be changed? If so, feel free to PM a moderator of the biology forums to get it done, and give the exact title you have in mind.

 

Can chemicals remember previous states and previous chemical reactions? If so this would imply some sort of marker on the chemical as to identify what has previously happened? Or am I wrong?

[InfiniteNow]

Can chemicals remember previous states and previous chemical reactions? If so this would imply some sort of marker on the chemical as to identify what has previously happened? Or am I wrong?

 

I've never encountered that concept that chemicals have the structure in place for, what we generally consider to be, memory. Can you explain in greater detail what you mean or what you are asking?

[Fatstep]

I've never encountered that concept that chemicals have the structure in place for, what we generally consider to be, memory. Can you explain in greater detail what you mean or what you are asking?

 

Actually I was referring to this, but accidentally forgot to quote it.

It is probably the outcome of the refusal of the people to believe that their observation power, intellegence and mindset can stem from a thing as mundane and normal as a brain made of solid matter.

It is difficult to accept that the seemingly enormous mental realm is nothing more than nervous impulses and chemical signals, all regulated by things that are totally mechanical.

[Surattius]

"Do souls exist?" is a big question; perhaps the biggest one there is.

 

Personally, I have evolved to think that a soul is DEVELOPED as the organism does. We "grow" our souls through living and learning. A soul is, as a previous poster remarked, a combination of character and experience, and our experience will transform us. A soul can be ruined by awful experiences that occur too early in life.

 

That is the philosophy I've developed. But more germane to the question embryonic stem cell research, I think that such cells have potential for soul, but have not yet developed them. That leads one to another grey area, but since the debate calls for a decision, and I think that ESC would be hugely advantageous in prolonging lives of those with established souls, I would vote for using them for something useful was a million times better both practically and morally than destroying them.