Grumpy SantaPosts: 272Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 6:27 pm
I agree, it depends, what do you mean by "a human". I have explained the context of the meaning of "a human" when I say that the zygote is a human. I don't mean to say it is a person, nor "a human" in any other context. Just cladistics, clade hominina. Look it up.
And this doesn't give the anti-abortion any ammunition. In fact it makes their line "it is human!! (while citing biology textbooks)" just metaphorically like blank bullets. Because human (in the context that I am saying) doesn't mean person and it doesn't mean it has rights and it doesn't mean it justifies that we can force a women to remain pregnant. So the point that it is biologically a human with respect to the issue of abortion is moot.
So truly then it's all about definition. By your definition (see below) the zygote of a human most definitely qualifies as human while it is not yet a "person". If the title was "Is a human zygote a person" instead of "a human" there would have been likely much less haggling over words.
I was, in all honestly, in full agreement from a cladistic sense but looking at the particular question from a "person" sense, as I'm sure you know by now.
Humans are a subset of:
Eukaryotes, Ophisthokonts, Metazoans, Eumetazoans, Bilaterians, Deuterostomes, Chordates, Craniates, Vertebrates, Gnathostomes, Teleostomes, Sarcopterygians, Stegocephalians, Tetrapods, Anthracosaurs, Amniotes, Synapsids, Therapsids, Cynodonts, Mammals, Placentals, Primates, Haplorhines, Simians, Catarrhines, Hominoids, Hominids, Hominines and Hominins.
Too good to delete.
J. R. R. Tolkien was a Middle Earth Creationist.