Pro-life apologist extraordinaire, Scott Klusendorf, has written an excellent post today on the topic of why so many Americans have a hard time grasping the humanity and moral quality of human embryos. In brief, it is because they see human beings as things that are constructed rather than formed. To quote Klusendorf:
Most people think an embryo is constructed piece by piece rather than something that develops from within. Consider a car, for example. When does the car come to be? Some might say it’s when the body is welded to the frame, giving the appearance of a vehicle. Others insist there can be no car until the engine and transmission are installed, thus enabling the car to move. Others still point to the addition of wheels, without which a vehicle cannot make functional contact with the road.
But no one argues the car is there from the very beginning, as, for example, when the first two metal plates are welded together. After all, those same metal plates can be used to construct some other object like a boat or plane. Only gradually does the assemblage of random parts result in the construction of a car.
…[M]ost Americans see the fetus exactly the same way-as something that’s constructed part by part. It’s precisely this understanding…that renders pro-life arguments absurd to so many people. As they see it, embryos are no more human beings in early stages of their construction than metal plates are cars in the early stages of theirs.
…
[T]he construction analogy is deeply flawed. Embryos aren’t constructed piece by piece from the outside; they develop themselves from within. That is to say, they do something no constructed thing could ever do: They direct their own internal growth and maturation-and this entails continuity of being. Unlike cars, developing embryos have no outside builder. They’re all there just as soon as growth begins from within. In short, living organisms define and form themselves.
Unlike cars, then, human embryos are human from the onset of development, not at the terminus of development (or any other point along the way). In fact, if they weren’t human at the beginning, they could not develop themselves in a human fashion throughout the process. I think this distinction between construction and development is a powerful and important point to incorporate into our pro-life apologetic.
November 18, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Their humanity is not in question, but is rather irrelevant (are beings from another planet not human? should we treat them as property, even if they were self-aware and intelligent?). What matters is whether an embryo/foetus possesses personhood, and we can rather clearly say that it does not. In fact, a person, by any at leat intersubjective standard (including autonomy and intentionality) does not come into being until sometime after birth, but since that time differs for different people, we err on the side of caution and ascribe the beginning of it to the moment of birth.
LikeLike
November 19, 2008 at 11:24 am
Jorg,
Please define for me what a person is, and where you get that definition, and then justify it philosophically/rationally. Also, please answer for me the objective basis on which you conclude that value inheres in personhood, not humanity.
Jason
LikeLike
January 19, 2009 at 9:18 am
Psalm 139: “You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I will thank you because I am marvelously made; your works are wonderful, and I know it well. My body was not hidden from you, while I was being made in secret . . .”
Sounds like construction to me.
LikeLike
January 19, 2009 at 11:10 am
For a man who seems to take so little of the Bible literally, I am amazed that you would take poetic language literally! Even if I took this passage in a literal sense as descriptive of how God makes humans, it would not contradict Scott’s point. Obviously humans grow and change in the womb. Obviously one part is added to another. That’s not the issue. The issue is whether that growing thing is fully human from the get-go, or if it only becomes human once all its parts have been assembled. David is merely acknowledging God’s activity in the assembly process. He is not affirming that he was not a human until the process was complete.
Jason
LikeLike