[jennyp]

Since it is a fact that an individual lifetime is a continuum that begins at fecundation, at conception, it is glaringly paradoxical to arbitrarily remove any age along that continuum in an effort to prove a later start to the continuum ... If a person tells you that he or she originated at 18 weeks from conception, or originated when she or he took their first breath, or originated when his or her brain first had a thought, or originated when his or her heart muscle first contracted, or originated when her or his gonads first functioned, just remember, the lifetime of every individual human BEING begins at their unique conception/fecundation and to choose some other point to believe the continuum begins is absolutely arbitrarily illogical, not based in science or truth.

OK, but now continue the continuum... When does this person's life end?

Should we say it doesn't end until every cell in their body has died? If your concept of a person's life is internally consistent, you have no other choice. Think about the absurdities that would imply. Are you comfortable with that?

[MHGinTN]

You've appealed to the notion of form and function as the means to define an 'alive' human being, for any stage/age of that human. ... A good approach to the subject, though not a simple thought. It's a useful perspective to take!

More formidible minds than mine ought to address this and expound on your thoughful notion, but here's my 'first thought'.

The adult human is well adapted to living in the environment around us (outside the womb). The form and function of the complexity that is an individual human being in the adult stage are thus the defining characteristics for that age. To ask 'when do these form and function characteristics cease to define the being' has been addressed by societies, and now medical science, ever since, I suppose, we began dealing with our dead. At present, medical science uses a 'death protocol' when contemplating organ harvesting from an individual body. But it would be useful to note that the definition for 'dead' is also based on the form and function that previously defined 'alive'. That form and function notion, if applied logically to the emryo, would argue for a being present in utero because the embryo is well adapted in form and function for life at that age in the continuum. There isn't really any absurdity in such an apprroach and it would argue for protecting the individual human life present in embryonic age/stage.

[hocndoc]

""Should we say it doesn't end until every cell in their body has died? If your concept of a person's life is internally consistent, you have no other choice. Think about the absurdities that would imply. Are you comfortable with that?""


If that cell (those cells) is capable of continually carrying out the normal functions of the organism at that stage of development, then, yes.
This would only pertain to the cells that result from the first few cell divisions, however.