Post Reply
Page 1 of 36  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 36 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Sentience and Sapience
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 6:31AM #1
bluehorserunning
Posts: 1,754

Transferred from the zef ownership thread:


You asked me how I can know if a zef is neither sentient nor sapient.   I said that a zef can't be sentient or sapient because it doesn't have a functional brain, as measured by EEGs.  You responded by talking about theoretical robots.


Here it is again, more formally.


1)Nothing that exists on the planet Earth as of 9/24/2009 can be sapient without a very complex*, functional CNS (that's central nervous system, Bei).


2)Nothing that exists on the planet Earth as of 9/24/2009 can be sentient without a moderately complex**, functional CNS.


3)Zefs do not have either moderate or very complex functional CNS's, as measured by EEGs (that's ElectroEncephaloGram, Bei), until the 3rd trimester at the earliest.


4)Therefore, zefs cannot be sentient or sapient before the 3rd trimester.


 


**moderately complex CNS defined, at a minimum, by three brain levels (hind, mid, and forebrains); the presence of multiple neurotransmitters mediating, at a minimum, sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous responses; a limbic system, including a thalamus and hypothalamus, to regulate and make sense of emotiosn; central processing of pain and proprioceptive signals involving more than the three neurons required for a reflex arc (in addition to said reflex arcs); and non-random electrical activity demostrating the functionality of these factors.


 


*very complex CNS defined by everything included in the moderately complex brain, but also including (at a minimum) well-developed orbitofrontal lobes, amygdala, prefrontal complexes for learning and personality development; and recognizably patterned electrical activity demonstrating the functionality of these factors.

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 7:59AM #2
Tmarie64
Posts: 5,277

The fetal brain doesn't even start developing until week 3 of the pregnancy at the very earliest.


At week 4 the fetus has a TAIL.... yeah, that's something all "people" have.


Of course, stating facts won't matter because emotions and histrionics are the cards many plers (bei) like to play.  Not facts.


 


 


 


 

James Thurber - "It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers."
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 1:20PM #3
Bei1052
Posts: 986

I'm just going to quote what I wrote out in the other thread.


I already know what you wrote out the first time. This is why I asked you to define sentience or sapience and the precise reason I pointed out to you that neither sentience nor sapience requires a "functioning brain" and vice versa (Do those who brains cease to function suddenly become non-sentient and non-sapient?). What's most annoying about this, is that any philosopher will tell you that neither sentience nor sapience, nor any philosophical concept, for that fact, is easily defineable (sp?). Indeed, you cannot just say "Oh, X doesn't have  Y so it's not Z", without setting forth what Z entails, for it's entirely possible that  W does have Y  yet is not Z, or that V doesn't have Y yet is Z. At least Peter Singer acknowledged this fact, something which you seemingly can't or don't want to.


So, here are a couple of easy questions you should be able to answer.


1.) How do we measure sentience/sapience?


2.) What are the characteristics of sentience/sapience?


3.) What things are sentient/sapient?


4.) How do we know something is or isn't sentient/sapient?


I've asked these questions before and got no response, so let's see if I get one now.


Sep 24, 2009 -- 7:59AM, Tmarie64 wrote:

The fetal brain doesn't even start developing until week 3 of the pregnancy at the very earliest.



Week six. And I've pointed this out countless numbers of times.


At week 4 the fetus has a TAIL.... yeah, that's something all "people" have.



And? It has exactly what it's supposed to have at that point in time.


Of course, stating facts won't matter because emotions and histrionics are the cards many plers (bei) like to play.  Not facts.



Yeah... Facts. Something you love. 'Cuz every time I post them (Like every time I make a claim and when you ask me to provide evidence of the claim), you always seem to disappear.


See, I've no reason to resort to emotions and histrionics. I don't need it. Objectivity vs. subjectivity and all of that :)


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 4:04PM #4
bluehorserunning
Posts: 1,754

Sep 24, 2009 -- 1:20PM, Bei1052 wrote:

Do those who brains cease to function suddenly become non-sentient and non-sapient?


Yes. That's why we can take people off of life support when they're brain-dead.


Bei, I've put forth my arguments about how to measure whether or not an organism is sentient or sapient.  Please respond to those arguments, and to the whole syllogism, if you can.


btw, consciousness, sentience, sapience, etc. are neurological, biological questions.  You can argue philosophy all you want, but you'll never get real answers because philosophy can't be taken to the lab.


1.) How do we measure sentience/sapience?


see post 1.


2.) What are the characteristics of sentience/sapience?


look up the words in a dictionary.


3.) What things are sentient/sapient?


see post 1.  If and when we ever develop AI that is even remotely complex enough to approach the borderline between sentient and non sentient, much less the borderline of sapience, we can re-evaluate requirements for sentience and sapience that involve hardware as well as wetware.  However, this is the abortion forum and we are concerned here with sentience and sapience as they apply to extant organisms, particularly zefs.


4.) How do we know something is or isn't sentient/sapient?


It's difficult to know when something *starts* becoming sentient or sapient - where the border between sentient and non-sentient is.  However, as with other progressive traits, the ends of the spectrum are quite easy to recognize.  Normally mentated adult humans are both sentient and sapient, by any dictionary definition; organisms like clams and early zefs, which lack developed brains, are not.  


questions for Bei:


How do *you* define sentience and sapience, if not by the standard English definitions of the words?


Do you think that zefs before the third trimester are sentient or sapient, both, or neither?

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 4:14PM #5
bluehorserunning
Posts: 1,754

Sep 24, 2009 -- 2:38PM, faith713 wrote:


Why do PCers need to distort facts? The fetus does not have a real "tail", that is a myth perpetuated by Haskell's fraudulent drawings...



*snort*


Here are some photos, then:


www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/on-line/lifecyc...


www.cgmh.org.tw/intr/intr5/c6700/OBGYN/F...


Haskell's drawings were not fraudulent; his theory was later discredited.  If his drawings do appear in modern biol texts, it's with the point that the theory of recapitulation has been discredited.  You can buy a back-edition biology text for cheap if you don't believe me.


as for why someone in medicine speaks differently than someone in science, it's probably because scientists don't need good bedside manners.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 4:28PM #6
Tmarie64
Posts: 5,277

Faith... Welcome to the 21st Century!  The world is not flat and the human fetus DOES go through a "fish" stage.


It DOES have a tail.  But, I don't expect you to ADMIT that your hysterical denials are wrong, that's ok.  We all know that that is a HUGE lie put forth by your side, and perpetuated by every idiot who doesn't have the good sense to know how to search for facts.  As long as you know it's a lie, that's enough for me.


 


 

James Thurber - "It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers."
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 5:56PM #7
faith713
Posts: 3,892

Sep 24, 2009 -- 4:28PM, Tmarie64 wrote:


Faith... Welcome to the 21st Century!  The world is not flat and the human fetus DOES go through a "fish" stage.


It DOES have a tail.  But, I don't expect you to ADMIT that your hysterical denials are wrong, that's ok.  We all know that that is a HUGE lie put forth by your side, and perpetuated by every idiot who doesn't have the good sense to know how to search for facts.  As long as you know it's a lie, that's enough for me.


 


 




Where are you getting this fish stage nonsense from? Cite your sources.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."--John14:6

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.-- John 3:16

"We love Him because He first loved us."--1 John 4:9-10

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear ... "
1 John 4:18
Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 6:08PM #8
Bei1052
Posts: 986

Sep 24, 2009 -- 4:04PM, bluehorserunning wrote:

Yes. That's why we can take people off of life support when they're brain-dead.



No, it's not. Sentience and sapience play absolutely no part in deciding to take someone off of life support. That's a decision made based on hospital policy, often times being the result of limited resources and diverting those resources to those who have a reversible condition. So would you kindly care to try again?


Bei, I've put forth my arguments about how to measure whether or not an organism is sentient or sapient.  Please respond to those arguments, and to the whole syllogism, if you can.



No, you haven't. Not in the slightest. But, lo and behold, it's no surprise that you couldn't answer this question. I knew you'd be unable to, because it's-- Dare I say it?-- Impossible. There is no scientific test to measure either, for they are the realms of philosophy. And, heck, I absolutely invite you to prove me wrong. You obviously have the internet, so please go and find me some kind of scientific article measuring either.


This should be VERY entertaining.


btw, consciousness, sentience, sapience, etc. are neurological, biological questions.  You can argue philosophy all you want, but you'll never get real answers because philosophy can't be taken to the lab.



I heartily chuckled to myself when reading this. You do realize that if this were the case-- Especially when we're talking about sentience and sapience-- You'd long since have been able to provide some kind of study laying out the concrete groundwork for the three. But, alas, you can't. Consciousness itself is hard enough for science to deal with (See: The hard problem of consciousness). Sentience and sapience are flatly impossible.


see post 1.



Which doesn't answer the question I asked you. I find it funny that you somehow assert that you can measure either sentience or sapience, when science not only can't, but philosophers absolutely struggle to define-- Much less measure-- Either term.


look up the words in a dictionary.



Not only does this not answer the question I asked you, but the dictionary simply cannot, and does not, define any characteristic of either sentience nor sapience. But I can understand the evasion.


see post 1.  If and when we ever develop AI that is even remotely complex enough to approach the borderline between sentient and non sentient, much less the borderline of sapience, we can re-evaluate requirements for sentience and sapience that involve hardware as well as wetware.  However, this is the abortion forum and we are concerned here with sentience and sapience as they apply to extant organisms, particularly zefs.



You know what's funny? It's that to answer this question you have to answer the question in #1 and #2, yet you haven't. At all. To make a distinction between the sentient and non-sentient and the sapient and non-sapient, you have to first have some kind of test set up which measures both sentience and sapience. But there is no such test, which means that you're just pulling things out of thing air. And it annoys me beyond belief, because it's intellectually DISHONEST.


It's difficult to know when something *starts* becoming sentient or sapient - where the border between sentient and non-sentient is.  However, as with other progressive traits, the ends of the spectrum are quite easy to recognize.  Normally mentated adult humans are both sentient and sapient, by any dictionary definition; organisms like clams and early zefs, which lack developed brains, are not.



You know, you can't determine the border between the sentient and non-sentient and the sapient and non-sapient, because you can't even define either or sentience or sapience to begin with. I asked you how we measure either and you evaded it. I asked you the characteristics of either and you evaded it. So how would you know what's sentient and what's not and what's sapient and what's not? The answer is that you wouldn't. You can only presuppose the fact that the thing you're talking about either is or isn't either of those things.


questions for Bei:


How do *you* define sentience and sapience, if not by the standard English definitions of the words?



I'll make you a deal. Once you take the time to define them, I'll take the time to define them. Honestly now. How do you ask someone to do the very thing you refuse to do?


Do you think that zefs before the third trimester are sentient or sapient, both, or neither?



We've been over this already. Nope. But, then again, neither are newborns ;)

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 8:24PM #9
Marysara722
Posts: 2,550


A few posts have been removed, one for providing a disingenuous & discredited website, and the rest for addressing the website which is off-topic.


This host notice is in place of individual emails.



MSara
Bnet Host
ADB

Quick Reply
Cancel
5 years ago  ::  Sep 24, 2009 - 8:31PM #10
Tmarie64
Posts: 5,277

Sep 24, 2009 -- 5:56PM, faith713 wrote:


Sep 24, 2009 -- 4:28PM, Tmarie64 wrote:


Faith... Welcome to the 21st Century!  The world is not flat and the human fetus DOES go through a "fish" stage.


It DOES have a tail.  But, I don't expect you to ADMIT that your hysterical denials are wrong, that's ok.  We all know that that is a HUGE lie put forth by your side, and perpetuated by every idiot who doesn't have the good sense to know how to search for facts.  As long as you know it's a lie, that's enough for me.


 




Where are you getting this fish stage nonsense from? Cite your sources.




See post #5.  Here's a thought.. actually CLICK THE LINK and LOOK at the pictures.


Unlike the site you quoted, these are actual DOCTORS with no hate agenda.


 

James Thurber - "It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers."
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 36  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 36 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook