Catholic Readers discussion
Promotions, own books, etc.
>
New post in my blog on popular science
Latest post in my blog on popular science:My 10 favorite scientific discoveries of the 20th century
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Thirteen Months in One Year?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:The best years of our lives
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Copyright and e-books
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:The weak anthropic principle: Are we alone in the galaxy?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
An informative read, chuck full of interesting facts. Thanks, Manuel.
I really like this, Manuel. Is it in print form anywhere?
Frances wrote: "I really like this, Manuel. Is it in print form anywhere?"It is, I wrote a book about this, but it has been published only in Spanish: La Vida En Otros Mundos ("Life in other worlds").
Thank you. Then I will copy it down!
Latest post in my blog on popular science:The hijacking of the Big Bang
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Thank you, Manuel. I look forward to these treatises; they enable me to learn all that I missed in my physics classes.
Good post, Manuel. I remember being taught in elementary school (35 or so years ago) that people had to believe in either the Big Bang OR God. I was much older before I understood enough to know that was completely false.
One of my readers in the Spanish version of this post has written this in a comment (my translation into English):[We find this post] very successful, especially the end of the post, because some people are beginning to get fed up with so much manipulation. To deny God anything goes, without the slightest intellectual modesty.
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Towards a reasonable use of COVID vaccines
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Super-accurate innumeracy
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Will traveling to the stars be possible?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Generational interstellar travel
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Interstellar travel in suspended animation
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Traveling at the speed of light
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Superluminal interstellar travel
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Masking against COVID-19, yes or no?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:October the first is too late
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Matter and antimatter. Why are we here?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:The recovery of extinct species
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Compatible, incompatible, possible, impossible
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Solar energy and thermal pollution
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:A Canticle for Leibowitz
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Utopias and dystopias
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:The abolition of man
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Science was never a danger for my Catholicism - Part I
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Latest post in my blog on popular science:Science was never a danger for my Catholicism - Part II
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...
Your comment, "For science, this is very clear: man begins at the moment of fertilization of the ovum by the sperm" raises many questions:1) Science can define a DNA molecule or a fertilized egg. But when has science defined "man?"
2) As I understand it, "man" is defined by his unique understanding of consciousness, especially in his relationship with God. The Prophet Jeremiah wrote, 'The word of the LORD came to me, saying, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you ..."' So it seems we humans are conscious of "man" even before the moment of fertilization."
My post deals with science, not with a philosophical definition of "man." What science says about the beginning of life is not only applicable to "man," but to any species with sexual reproduction. The life of a new individual starts with the fertilization of an ovum by an sperm. Ova and sperm are not new individuals, they are cells of different individuals (the "mother" and the "father" of the new individual).
This is well-known by biologists since the mid-19th-century. More detail in this post: https://populscience.blogspot.com/201...
As to Jeremiah's words, they mean that we are in the mind of God since before the creation of the universe, they don't refer to ova and sperm.
Manuel wrote: "My post deals with science, not with a philosophical definition of "man." Thank you, Manuel, for the clarification. So can we agree that the word "man" is NOT the scientific term for a fertilized egg? From a scientific perspective, the fertilized egg needs the body of the mother to mature, be born, and then be raised for a number of years before we can call it a man or a woman.
I'd say that we can't call it an adult man or woman. But we can call it a human being (man or woman, male or female) from the state of a fertilized ovum (the zygote) to its death, for during the whole process it is the same individual.Look at it this way:
Consider a hen that has laid an egg. The egg is made of four parts: 1. The eggshell, which protects the embryo from outer dangers. 2. The white. 3. The yolk. 4. A fertilized ovum at the top of the yolk. Using the energy (heat) provided by the brooding hen, the fertilized ovum develops into an embryo and then into a baby chicken, which after 21 days breaks the eggshell and gets out, grows, and becomes an adult hen or cock. From the state of a fertilized ovum, through the state of an embryo, up to an adult hen or cock, and then to death, we have here a single individual of the chicken species, different from its mother.
Now consider a pregnant placental female: the body of the mother provides energy (heat) as the brooding hen. It also protects from outer dangers, as the eggshell. It also provides food through the placenta, as the white and the yolk. Using all this, the fertilized ovum develops into an embryo, then into a baby (the birth is equivalent to the chicken breaking the eggshell), then into a child, then into an adult man or woman, and so until death. In all this process we have here an individual of the human species, different from the mother.
You have given me an idea: I may write a new post for my blog explaining this.
Manuel wrote: "I'd say that we can't call it an adult man or woman. But we can call it a human being (man or woman, male or female) from the state of a fertilized ovum (the zygote) to its death, for during the wh..."Thank you for your response.
By your own definition, a chicken and an egg are scientifically different. The egg is separated from the chicken BEFORE it hatches. So yes, in the case of the chicken, the egg is an individual organism.
But not so with Homo sapiens and mammals. Unlike the chicken egg, the embryo remains dependent and connected to the mother, and therefore not considered an individual organism until after birth.
No, you are wrong. The chicken is inside the egg as the mammal embryo is inside the mother. The mother is equivalent to the egg, the chicken and human embryos are equivalent.The human embryo is not connected to the mother: the placenta separates them. Their blood systems are disconnected, except for the exchange of a few cells. That's the reason why mother and child can have incompatible blood types, unless the mother has been sensitized by a previous pregnancy.
Both chicken and mammals are dependent on their mothers. The chicken would never hatch if the mother didn't give it energy (heat). A human baby is also hugely dependent on their parents.
Biology is very clear: a new individual of a given species starts at the fertilization of an ovum by a sperm. There is no scientific way to justify abortion (killing a new human being). Even atheistic biologists know this. If they favor abortion, it's because they deny that human beings have any special dignity, and in their opinion they can be eliminated if the law so decides.
So don't twist what I have said to make it appear similar to what you are saying. You wrote: Unlike the chicken egg, the embryo remains dependent and connected to the mother, and therefore not considered an individual organism until after birth. This is false, according to scientific knowledge. Abortion is killing a human being.
Manuel wrote: "No, you are wrong. The mother is equivalent to the egg, the chicken and human embryos are equivalent.."Please see reply on message #394.
Thank you
Carmen wrote: "Manuel wrote: "No, you are wrong. The chicken is inside the egg as the mammal embryo is inside the mother. The mother is equivalent to the egg, ..."You wrote, "The mother is equivalent to the egg, the chicken and human embryos are equivalent."
You can't truly believe that?
You continue, "The chicken would never hatch if the mother didn't give it energy (heat)."
Really? Try explaining that to every child that studies eggs that hatch in incubators at school.
Then you add, "There is no scientific way to justify abortion."
How do you jump from biology to morality?
It is clear that you are not a biologist, much less a bio-ethicist.
Carmen wrote: "You wrote, "The mother is equivalent to the egg, the chicken and human embryos are equivalent."You can't truly believe that?"
Yes. And this is the consensus of biologists. The first part (the mother is equivalent to the egg) is just from the point of view of the embryo. The second part (the chicken and human embryos are equivalent) is biologically evident.
Carmen wrote: "You continue, "The chicken would never hatch if the mother didn't give it energy (heat)."
Really? Try explaining that to every child that studies eggs that hatch in incubators at school."
Come on! I was speaking about what happens in nature. There are no incubators in nature. On the other hand, you can also use incubators with human embryos, although not during the whole pregnancy, because placental mammals are physiologically much more complicated than oviparous animals, and it's harder to incubate them.
Carmen wrote: "It is clear that you are not a biologist, much less a bio-ethicist."
Nicolas Jouve is my friend. We have collaborated for a long time in a group about science and faith. He is emeritus professor of Genetics, and has been for many years a member of the Spanish Official Committee on Bioethics. Here you have a web page (in Spanish) describing his work and scientific history:
https://www.unir.net/profesores/nicol...
Nicolas Jouve is an expert in what we have been discussing about. He is in total agreement with what I have explained here. I suppose you won't doubt his capacity. If you insist, I will contact him and ask him to take part in this discussion.
What we are discussing here can be expressed in very few words: Regardless of what the laws may say, abortion is a crime, because a human being is killed. Look how this was expressed by a famous biologist, Jean Rostand (who by the way, was not a Christian), in his book "Le courrier d'un biologiste":
Perhaps it's a small crime, killing a human being a few days old, who measures just a few millimeters, and does not have a human shape. But, anyway, a crime, and respect for humans may have something to say about it.
Manuel: "consensus of biologists. The first part (the mother is equivalent to the egg) is just from the point of view of the embryo."Carmen: How many embryos have these "biologists" interviewed to know their "point of view." Or perhaps this is only your point of view.
Manuel: "Come on! I was speaking about what happens in nature. There are no incubators in nature."
Carmen: Well, snakes leave their eggs in the sun to incubate them. So nature can provide heat. But human embryos CANNOT survive more than a week without the mother.
Manuel: "Nicolas Jouve is an expert in what we have been discussing about. ... I will contact him and ask him to take part in this discussion."
Carmen: Sí! Por favor! Me encantaría platicar con tu amigo.
Carmen, before we go on with this discussion, I'd like to ask you two questions:First: What are your credentials on biology and bioethics? (So I can present you to my friend).
Second: This group is called "Catholic Readers" and you are a member. Are you a Catholic? If yes, how can you conform your ideas about abortion with the teaching of the Church, which calls abortion "an abominable crime"? (John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis).
Manuel wrote: "First: What are your credentials on biology and bioethics? (So I can present you to my friend)."
My mother and her family, and my father's family are all medical people: pharmacists, nurses, MDs, etc. In college, microbiology was my favorite, but later became more interested in philosophy.
I studied at various graduate theological unions, and have an MA and various certifications. I worked with the faith formation department in our diocese.
I'm a cradle Catholic (baptized and confirmed as an infant), and have been in full communion since age seven. And Spanish is my first language.
My interest is more on the morality of producing "test-tube" babies for profit. I find it interesting that so-called "pro-life" advocates are okay with raping 10 year-olds and forcing them to carry the rapist's child to term. One has to ask if the market value of the embryo might be a factor.
Thank you for raising a most interesting discussion.
Carmen wrote: "It is clear that you are not a biologist, much less a bio-ethicist."As you have given me your credentials, I'll give you mine:
I am a computer scientist and a doctor in communication engineering, and have worked most of my life in the field of simulation (especially biological-ecological simulation) and artificial life.
During my professional life (over half a century by now) I have kept myself well informed on the main advances on biology and bioethics. Many years ago, I wrote a two-volume book on systematic zoology. I have written several books and many articles on biological subjects. Just one example: The Fifth Level of Evolution
And by the way, since over fifty years ago, I am married to a biologist.
I have sent an e-mail to Nicolas Jouve, and as soon as he answers I'll keep you informed.
Carmen: Well, snakes leave their eggs in the sun to incubate them. So nature can provide heat. But human embryos CANNOT survive more than a week without the mother.Manuel: I was comparing chicken eggs to human embryos, not snake eggs. If you want to include other species, there are many more cases. For instance, in the case of the midwife toad, the male broods the eggs in little bags inside its skin. Those embryos are totally dependent on their father. Will you say those embryos are not members of their toad species until they are hatched, while other toad species that spawn their eggs in the water and let them hatch there are members of their species from the beginning?
Also, you say that human embryos CANNOT survive more than a week without their mother. How long will survive a baby, after it has been born, if nobody takes care of it? How long would survive a critically sick person in an ICU without any care? Are babies and critically sick persons not human?
How long would you (or I) survive if we were in Robinson Crusoe's place? Perhaps a week? Or even less? We are totally dependent of other people to go on living. Are we not human because of that?
So you see, being dependent has nothing to do with being human or not.
Catholic Readers
Books mentioned in this topic
Time and Man (other topics)The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (other topics)
The Fifth Level of Evolution (other topics)
La Vida En Otros Mundos (other topics)
Carbon-14: The Shroud of Turin (other topics)
Will we be able to build conscious beings?
https://populscience.blogspot.com/202...