Personhood
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
12-02-2014, 07:04 PM
RE: Personhood
I have no problem with the mother keeping her child alive. I just don't want to see them recieve any taxpayer dollars specifically for a child that will NEVER contribute to socitety itself. Individuals, go ahead and give them support, but any government support from taxpayer money is a big "fuck you".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:07 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:04 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  I have no problem with the mother keeping her child alive. I just don't want to see them recieve any taxpayer dollars specifically for a child that will NEVER contribute to socitety itself. Individuals, go ahead and give them support, but any government support from taxpayer money is a big "fuck you".

I would like to note that there are people who are born perfectly healthy and with all their faculties that do not contribute a damn thing to society.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Anjele's post
12-02-2014, 07:15 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:07 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 07:04 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  I have no problem with the mother keeping her child alive. I just don't want to see them recieve any taxpayer dollars specifically for a child that will NEVER contribute to socitety itself. Individuals, go ahead and give them support, but any government support from taxpayer money is a big "fuck you".

I would like to note that there are people who are born perfectly healthy and with all their faculties that do not contribute a damn thing to society.

Potential...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:28 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:15 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 07:07 PM)Anjele Wrote:  I would like to note that there are people who are born perfectly healthy and with all their faculties that do not contribute a damn thing to society.

Potential...

Potential doesn't pay the bills.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:33 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:28 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 07:15 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  Potential...

Potential doesn't pay the bills.

That is true. If you have a potentially valuable investment opportunity, it isn't guaranteed to be profitable, but it still COULD be.

You don't invest in things that you know have ZERO potential, unless you're emotionally attached and/or stupid.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:42 PM
RE: Personhood
So should they euthanize this baby so that his organs can be harvested as suggested by the OP?

If so, would you be willing/able to do that?

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:48 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 09:42 AM)BeccaBoo Wrote:  1) No brain function is possible without the brain stem, and

That is not true. The brainstem can be destroyed and the cerebrum can continue to function; this can happen in cases of brainstem compression, brainstem haemorrhage and basilar artery thrombosis. In these--admittedly rare--cases the patient will experience a locked-in syndrome.

Quote:2) When a half of the brain is missing, the other half eventually can compensate for a great deal,

Not quite. That is something of an exaggeration and it applies only to the cerebrum because of its lateralization of function. The brainstem has no capacity for functional reorganization with respect to functions that are performed by the cerebrum. To claim otherwise is the equivalent of claiming that the liver can replace the function of the kidneys.

Quote:
It appears that there is much more we don't know about the brain than we do know, and that there is some form of sentience (feeling and subjectivity) functioning in the brain stem.

No, the brainstem by itself is unable to create a subjectivity as we experience it, all that it can provide is primitive stimulus-response processing. People that have a non-functioning brainstem lose only the somatic aspect of their subjectivity, it is otherwise intact. Subjectivity is a complex phenomenon that is produced by the cerebrum. The child in question would experience somatic sensations but it is unlikely they will be as we experience them.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 07:57 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:48 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(12-02-2014 09:42 AM)BeccaBoo Wrote:  1) No brain function is possible without the brain stem, and

That is not true. The brainstem can be destroyed and the cerebrum can continue to function; this can happen in cases of brainstem compression, brainstem haemorrhage and basilar artery thrombosis. In these--admittedly rare--cases the patient will experience a locked-in syndrome.

Quote:2) When a half of the brain is missing, the other half eventually can compensate for a great deal,

Not quite. That is something of an exaggeration and it applies only to the cerebrum because of its lateralization of function. The brainstem has no capacity for functional reorganization with respect to functions that are performed by the cerebrum. To claim otherwise is the equivalent of claiming that the liver can replace the function of the kidneys.

Quote:
It appears that there is much more we don't know about the brain than we do know, and that there is some form of sentience (feeling and subjectivity) functioning in the brain stem.

No, the brainstem by itself is unable to create a subjectivity as we experience it, all that it can provide is primitive stimulus-response processing. People that have a non-functioning brainstem lose only the somatic aspect of their subjectivity, it is otherwise intact. Subjectivity is a complex phenomenon that is produced by the cerebrum. The child in question would experience somatic sensations but it is unlikely they will be as we experience them.

In the video they say he seems to know when his mother is holding him verses someone else. Do you think this is just wishful thinking?

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:23 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:04 PM)WeAreTheCosmos Wrote:  I have no problem with the mother keeping her child alive. I just don't want to see them recieve any taxpayer dollars specifically for a child that will NEVER contribute to socitety itself. Individuals, go ahead and give them support, but any government support from taxpayer money is a big "fuck you".

That is harsh but it is pragmatic. I am conflicted on this matter--and this goes back to what DLJ refers to--because I don't have an axiology within which to reason consistently about these sorts of problems. We've rightly discarded the concept of a soul as establishing personhood and we--the West--have successively discarded an array of "grand narratives" which previously prescribed a purpose and a role such that we really don't know what we are doing and why we are doing it.

From the perspective of the economics of healthcare your position is sound; health budgets are finite and stretched and they should be spent in a way that will maximize the welfare of as many people as possible. But I am unsure if there is a consensus regarding this model of healthcare and what its underlying axiology is and whether we really want it.

Until we--of the West--come to fill the void that we have created by trashing all so-called grand narratives issues such as this will continue to be problematic because there is an absence of a common ground.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-02-2014, 08:25 PM
RE: Personhood
(12-02-2014 07:42 PM)Anjele Wrote:  So should they euthanize this baby so that his organs can be harvested as suggested by the OP?

If so, would you be willing/able to do that?

Not unless the mother wanted that... I was just saying that I would refuse to pay for the child in any way because its not mine and it will never be able to contribute to society. Taxpayer money should not be used to keep the kid alive. Not saying it is... I'd rather not even find out if it is, that would be a piss off.

Also, I don't know if I could let the kid die if it was mine. I certainly wouldn't feel right accepting taxpayer money for the kid though. I think I might be able to have the organs donated, as I make bonds with personalities more than objects (even animated ones).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: