The Dispute over Delayed Animation: When Does a Human Being Begin?

Q3 Arts and Humanities Studia Gilsoniana Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.26385/SG.090317
Andrzej Maryniarczyk
{"title":"The Dispute over Delayed Animation: When Does a Human Being Begin?","authors":"Andrzej Maryniarczyk","doi":"10.26385/SG.090317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The dispute over delayed animation, although it has its beginnings already in ancient philosophy and culture, started for good only in contemporary times when the right to kill unborn children (so-called abortion ) entered the canon of constitutional law and, what is even stranger, started to be proposed for inclusion into basic human rights. Despite being discussed nowadays mainly in medical and legal sciences, the problem involves disputes of an ethical, religious and ideological nature. In these discussions one can notice a clear lack of anthropological and metaphysical argumentation that would address the question about the beginning of the human being (which entails the question about the beginning of being per se ) in the light of common properties that belong to really existing beings, and the metaphysical laws that govern the manner in which things (including human embryos) exist. This article discusses understandings of the human being as they are found in Plato’s, Aristotle’s and Thomas Aquinas’s philosophical anthropology. It is this triad of approaches: Platonic, Aristotelian and Thomistic, that allows one both to notice the specificity of Aquinas’s approach and to resolve the dispute concerning delayed animation.","PeriodicalId":36983,"journal":{"name":"Studia Gilsoniana","volume":"229 1","pages":"423-465"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Gilsoniana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26385/SG.090317","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The dispute over delayed animation, although it has its beginnings already in ancient philosophy and culture, started for good only in contemporary times when the right to kill unborn children (so-called abortion ) entered the canon of constitutional law and, what is even stranger, started to be proposed for inclusion into basic human rights. Despite being discussed nowadays mainly in medical and legal sciences, the problem involves disputes of an ethical, religious and ideological nature. In these discussions one can notice a clear lack of anthropological and metaphysical argumentation that would address the question about the beginning of the human being (which entails the question about the beginning of being per se ) in the light of common properties that belong to really existing beings, and the metaphysical laws that govern the manner in which things (including human embryos) exist. This article discusses understandings of the human being as they are found in Plato’s, Aristotle’s and Thomas Aquinas’s philosophical anthropology. It is this triad of approaches: Platonic, Aristotelian and Thomistic, that allows one both to notice the specificity of Aquinas’s approach and to resolve the dispute concerning delayed animation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
延迟动画之争:人类何时开始?
关于延迟动画的争论,虽然在古代哲学和文化中就已经开始了,但直到当代,当杀死未出生的孩子(所谓的堕胎)的权利进入宪法的规范,更奇怪的是,开始被提议纳入基本人权时,才开始永久地开始。尽管目前主要在医学和法学领域讨论这个问题,但它涉及伦理、宗教和意识形态方面的争议。在这些讨论中,人们可以注意到明显缺乏人类学和形而上学的论证,这些论证将根据属于真正存在的存在的共同属性来解决关于人类起源的问题(这需要关于存在本身的起源的问题),以及支配事物(包括人类胚胎)存在方式的形而上学法则。本文讨论了柏拉图、亚里士多德和托马斯·阿奎那的哲学人类学对人类的理解。正是这三种方法:柏拉图式、亚里士多德式和托马斯式,使人们既注意到阿奎那方法的特殊性,又解决了关于延迟动画的争议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studia Gilsoniana
Studia Gilsoniana Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
On the Foundational Compatibility of Phenomenology and Thomism On Affirming the Unintelligible God: Examining Denys Turner’s Account of Atheism Étienne Gilson: L’idée de la beauté et sa conception de l’art Separation as the Basic Method of Realistic Metaphysics: The Approach by the Lublin Philosophical School Representatives La critica alla Rivoluzione nel pensiero di Augusto Del Noce by Roberto de Mattei
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1