I dream of giant squirrels.
//
Main:
How many components can one remove from a human being and still have them be a person? It's pretty safe to say that an individual who has lost their hand is still a person, and beyond that, not 95% of a person, but a person. Thus a human is not simply a sum of their parts or they could be more easily quantified. Even without lungs, a person can be placed in an iron lung and still be a person (rather than ... I dunno ... a cyborg?). Hearts can be replaced, so not even they can be considered what makes someone a person. The spinal chord can even be severed. The brain, then, seems to be the only viable option left.
But if the brain is removed and placed in a protein-rich ooze with just the right amount of electrical current running through it (in short, kept alive), would that single brain, then, be a person?
If the answer is "no", then it begs the question "why not?".
There are a few possibilities to this. Firstly, there is, of course, the "Dude, it's a fucking brain in a jar!" argument. I know; keep an open mind (pun intended). The second is that an isolated brain cannot communicate. Then again, neither can vegetables (the human kind, not the vegetable kind), so this isn't really a good gauge as to the person-ness of the brain (it also fails as a relevant test to determine artificial intelligence, called the Turing Test, but I digress). Lastly is the obvious trait that it lacks a body and supporting organs. However, it has already been demonstrated above that no other single organ or aspect of the body is truly important in determining whether or not someone is a person, so this, also, is out.
But if the answer is "yes", then that fundamentally alters the question of what it means to be a person.
Quote:"What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form, in moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though, by your smiling, you seem to say so."-William Shakespeare, Hamlet
Main:
How many components can one remove from a human being and still have them be a person? It's pretty safe to say that an individual who has lost their hand is still a person, and beyond that, not 95% of a person, but a person. Thus a human is not simply a sum of their parts or they could be more easily quantified. Even without lungs, a person can be placed in an iron lung and still be a person (rather than ... I dunno ... a cyborg?). Hearts can be replaced, so not even they can be considered what makes someone a person. The spinal chord can even be severed. The brain, then, seems to be the only viable option left.
But if the brain is removed and placed in a protein-rich ooze with just the right amount of electrical current running through it (in short, kept alive), would that single brain, then, be a person?
If the answer is "no", then it begs the question "why not?".
There are a few possibilities to this. Firstly, there is, of course, the "Dude, it's a fucking brain in a jar!" argument. I know; keep an open mind (pun intended). The second is that an isolated brain cannot communicate. Then again, neither can vegetables (the human kind, not the vegetable kind), so this isn't really a good gauge as to the person-ness of the brain (it also fails as a relevant test to determine artificial intelligence, called the Turing Test, but I digress). Lastly is the obvious trait that it lacks a body and supporting organs. However, it has already been demonstrated above that no other single organ or aspect of the body is truly important in determining whether or not someone is a person, so this, also, is out.
But if the answer is "yes", then that fundamentally alters the question of what it means to be a person.
Quote:"What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form, in moving, how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? man delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though, by your smiling, you seem to say so."-William Shakespeare, Hamlet