The Ultimate Question
 

I've been meaning to bring this up for quite a while and will do so now because it came up in another thread.

"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"

So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been meaning to bring this up for quite a while and will do so now because it came up in another thread.

"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"

So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you have to consider the fitness of all the sperm that make it to the egg and contribute to the breakdown of the egg membrane allowing one sperm to enter the egg. From what I understand, it takes the catalytic enzymes of multiple sperm to breakdown the egg. There's an element of luck involved, but genetics and the developmental/environmental aspects of spermatogenesis would determine what type of sperm would be most likely to reach the egg. Obviously luck is a major factor in which sperm make it. I'm saying there's a little bit of a team element involved with differential fitness for some members of the team increasing the probability of a specific range of "yous" rather than a singular luck factor as you imply here.

From a more philosophical perspective, the whole notion of "you" is pretty vague here. I would expect different genetics to lead to very different outcomes in a chaotic manner. How different would my life have to be for me to no longer be me? The combination of nature and nurture (genetics and environment) results in the person we become so from the point of DNA fusion producing a zygote, different, I'd even expect startlingly different, outcomes would result from the interactions with a zygote/morula/blastula/gastrula/neurula with one genome with its environment (the mother's Fallopian (also called uterine) tube and then uterus).

I could see the strict dependence upon initial genetics conditions resulting in a discernably different me though I would probably have a similar set of talents, disease profile, other physical traits, and behavior.

Obviously, my perspective is one of linear causality.

So, those are the assumptions under which I operate.

I consider action to be the defining characterist of a person. As Kuato said, "You are what you do." Given that is the case and given how unlikely I consider the action in a person's life to be the same with slight tweaks in genetics and interaction with the world in a chaotic manner, I'd say it's unlikely I would be the same me if my genetics were slightly altered by me having come from a sperm a couple microns away from the one that lead to me.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

ive wondered this myself.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

Is the following another way of asking the same question (and a few follow-ups)? If not the same - I think it can be included in the discussion, no?

If (when?) we can clone humans, will the clone be the same person? Can a clone exist at the same time as the original; or does the clone have to be “born” after the original is dead?

Is there something other than only DNA? (To the believer, I think there is - the soul. Non-believer’s - not sure, maybe the mind/thought/consciousness.)

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been meaning to bring this up for quite a while and will do so now because it came up in another thread.

"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"

So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]I think that they have settled on 60% nurture 40% nature. Certainly people would nurture you differently with a different sex organ. Perhaps even so with freckles. But I on the other hand am a unique snowflake.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]

"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"

So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

Well I guess you can be ‘inventive’ about your definition of you. But really the answer has to be No.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

Please define what is meant by "you".

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

"Please define what is meant by "you"."

Your sense of "self". What religious people call the soul.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

Here's my response in the other thread:
Yes, it would be very likely that a different sperm would give me only minor physical differences, but retain the same mental capabilities. However, another sperm could carry vastly different genetic information which would in turn no longer be recognizable as what I consider "me".

Had another sperm penetrated the egg first, there may not even have been a birth. Could I have been anyone other than me? Physically, yes. Mentally, no. How much did my upbringing effect who I am? If I had a different genetic makeup, I could have had a completely different hardwiring that would change completely who I am. I would no longer be me. "I" wouldn't exist, and a stranger would be responding.

What is the probability that a percentage of the sperm would still lead to "me"? According to http://humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/14/8/2036 the variance in sperm is quite high. So, as far as who "I" am, I consider myself extremely lucky to have come to be.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your sense of "self". What religious people call the soul.


[/ QUOTE ]
mind body dualism is not supported by all strands of christianity.

According to some Christians and some Atheists
The mind, soul and body together make up the 'person'.
Any seperation is either artificial or temporary, depending on your religious beliefs or lack thereof.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

Probability and Heredity. If you are a pure materialist,then what one receives from parents could very well be relegated to "chance" if only the sperm are considered. A person could say that from the Mother(one egg) comes the solidity in life while from the Father comes the various possibilities dependent upon which sperm penentrates the egg. But in this consideration in which each sperm is different and therefore there are multiple beings vying for existance. As a materialist you could not say "I received my traits from the sperm/egg" for you are the sperm/egg combination. It is out of consideration to say you would have had different traits if a different sperm had penentrated the egg. That would be a different being.

The only way you could logically say that "my traits are different because of the sperm/egg combination" and still be YOU is if YOU are not the sperm/egg and thusly enters the soul/spiritual nature of MAN.

You enter life with a pattern of form given by your parents(heredity) but you are very much involved with your growth in all areas. The physical body which you initially recieve is more like your colors/palette in which the human spirit/soul being does his work- "the artist within".

carlo

The utlimate hero
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"
<font color="white"> . </font>
So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

Your being, the Here-This which is you, that-which-acknowledges-itself, that which is conscious of its existence, is the product of a unique combination of elements.

The probability of you coming to be (you and not some other variant, of which, of course, you can have no inkling) is so fantastically small as to be practically zero.

In other words, you have no business being here -- each and everyone of you.

(The ultimate act of heroism is to realize this, to stop denying it. And, instead of going crazy or committing suicide, to carry the burden of life's wonderment and horror through, and make the best of it. Ecce homo!)

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

I'm not the same "self" as I was 10 years ago. My sense of "self" is made up of all of my memories, and psychological make-up (my temperment, likes, dislikes, etc.) If my genetic make-up were different, then I would not have been the same physical person that I am today. I doubt that I would be the same psychological person, either... since my genetic make-up affects my brain, which then affects pretty much everything else. So, I think the answer would have to be "probably not". [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

In stock market wizzards one of the questions that was asked of people who turned $1000 into more than $400 000 000 was how much of your sucess was determined by luck and how much by ability?

Most people answered all skill in the long run none of the winners in this game are where they are today because of luck.

One man said 100% luck.

How can that be?

Some people are lucky enough to be born smart and some are not. Thats what it all comes down to.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

and this the 'ultimate' question in whose mind?..........b

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been meaning to bring this up for quite a while and will do so now because it came up in another thread.

"Why would it be anything other than simply getting to be the little lucky sperm and egg that made it through gestation to allow me to become a person?"

So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

It interests me how this question relates to chaos theory. A single tap on the shoulder resulting in a single sperm moving a hundredth of a millimeter can make the difference between someone being born with cancer or buck teeth.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

Hopefully you experience more than a "tap on the shoulder".

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
"Please define what is meant by "you"."

Your sense of "self". What religious people call the soul.

[/ QUOTE ]

The soul is infused by God and is not dependent on biological processes that might have occurred differently. And that soul is the eternal aspect of yourself that survives death. This is not merely intelligence or psychology, which are greatly dependent on those biological processes. Imagine if your soul, intelligence , memories and sense of self could be swapped into the body of man of the same age who was a tribesman eeking out a living on the edge of the Kalahari desert. How useful would that intelligence be in that environment, being the smartest dirt poor tribesman with no resources there? Probably not much as far as your life on earth went. But your soul, created by God for an eternal purpose, would still be no worse off than that of any man on earth since you could still attain the eternal end that God desires for you.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

And if I grant you that, what makes you so sure that this soul is infused at the momnent of conception?

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Your sense of "self". What religious people call the soul.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it’s perfectly possible for someone else to really believe (s)he is you.

Take someone and wipe their mind, then build up your brain structure within there’s. In theory you could create someone who thought (s)he was you, and was indistinguishable from you to most if not all observers.

Would that person be you? Would it make a difference if you were alive or dead? Would it make a difference if all evidence of the replacement were removed? Is Star Trek like teleportation a real possibility? Can you transplant your mind to a computer?

It all depends on how ‘you’ is defined. Just using an even more ambiguous concept like ‘soul’ for the definition is just an unhelpful cop out.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. If "I" had a slightly different genes, that would almost certainly have resulted in my being raised differently by my parents (especially in the case of being the other sex). I think Cyrus' response is outstanding, and have nothing more to add to it.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
And if I grant you that, what makes you so sure that this soul is infused at the momnent of conception?

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously because the Catholic Church teaches so for one thing. But also because an immortal soul is not something that Christians believe non-humans to possess, and thus biological generation would not be the cause. And as far as conception versus another point after the first cell has split a few times, then there is simply no reason for another point since a fetus is fetus is a fetus regardless of what stage of development it is at.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

"And as far as conception versus another point after the first cell has split a few times, then there is simply no reason for another point since a fetus is fetus is a fetus regardless of what stage of development it is at"

One reason would be to make sure there isn't a miscarriage. Don't Jews believe the infusion happens after forty days?

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

That seems to just be for psychological reasons to make the parents not feel as bad. And if I remember correctly, the Japanese traditionally did not name a child until 30 days after it's birth for similar reasons.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
So only that combination turns into "you". Might some other combination turn into the same "you" except with freckles (or a different sex organ)?

[/ QUOTE ]

We can go further -- given one egg and one sperm, there is more than one possible you. This is, in fact, provable -- Identical Twins. Same egg, same sperm, but you can have very different people.

Similarly, unless we care to argue that the twins have the same soul, or share a soul or something like that, it seems that any infusion of a soul into a human must take place sometime after conception (at least one of the twins received a soul at or after the fertilized egg splits).

A more interesting though unanswerable question is whether any soul is tied to the biology at all, or does the essence of what makes you, you come from somewhere else altogether.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

But the "moment of conception" can't be right, even if the God infusion theory is right. Because of twinning.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

It's not the same "you" if it has different DNA, or different freckles, or a different sex organ, or whatever.

It's something different.

(Note: this assumes the philosophy that "I" am not the same person "I" was two years ago)

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
But the "moment of conception" can't be right, even if the God infusion theory is right. Because of twinning.

[/ QUOTE ]

David-fantastic observation.

I'll consult for the official Catholic answer, but I speculate that if God knows that there will be twins, the soul infusion process would not be complete until the twinning process is finished.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]


...the soul infusion process...

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that a John Coltrane album??

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the "moment of conception" can't be right, even if the God infusion theory is right. Because of twinning.

[/ QUOTE ]

David-fantastic observation.

I'll consult for the official Catholic answer, but I speculate that if God knows that there will be twins, the soul infusion process would not be complete until the twinning process is finished.

[/ QUOTE ]

Saved you some time bigdaddy:

“Even within Roman Catholic teaching, the Vatican has not reached a conclusion about when a fetus becomes a person, and theologians take varied positions:

‘This declaration expressly leaves aside the question of the moment when the spiritual soul is infused. There is not a unanimous tradition on this point and authors are as yet in disagreement.’ Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (Vatican), Declaration on Procured Abortion, 1974

Source:

Thomas A. Shannon and Allan B. Wolter, O.F.M., "Reflections on the Moral Status of the Pre-Embryo," Theological Studies, 51:4 (1990), p. 619.

RJT

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Don't Jews believe the infusion happens after forty days?

[/ QUOTE ]

I may be wrong, but I think the Jewish view is that the fetus is a 'potential' life, rather than a life, until birth. I think it's Exodus: 21:22 that states that the destruction of a fetus is punishible by a fine (as opposed to Murder, which is a capital crime). Also, the Talmud is clear and graphic in it's view that until the greater part of the head is delivered, one must sacrifice the fetus to save the mother.

It was Aristotle who held that the soul enters the male fetus after 40 days, and the female fetus after 80 days.

Re: The Ultimate Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the "moment of conception" can't be right, even if the God infusion theory is right. Because of twinning.

[/ QUOTE ]

David-fantastic observation.

I'll consult for the official Catholic answer, but I speculate that if God knows that there will be twins, the soul infusion process would not be complete until the twinning process is finished.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or you can just say 2 souls infused into 1 cell because they will soon split. Since this isn't a biological thing (soul infusion), it can't be constrained by biology making such a thing impossible.