Yeah, none of our theories of consciousness are really testable yet and some aren't even testable at all, so we're almost completely in the dark for the time being.

I do think though that during deep, dreamless sleep there is no consciousness, and if there is I haven't experienced it. Even if not I think the impossible hypothetical I proposed stands. Just because a being isn't conscious right now doesn't mean that it's ok to kill that being.

Keep in mind that murder isn't wrong because it causes harm to a conscious being; there are ways of painless, instant killing but we still consider it murder. It's wrong because it prevents consciousness from extending into the future. It seems to me that this reasoning also applies to unconscious fetuses. On the other hand, though, why not extend that even before conception? If we follow this line of thought, shouldn't we consider it immoral to not try to conceive children at every waking moment so as to not prevent conscious minds from existing?

I don't really have a good answer to any of these questions. I'm starting to think maybe you're right that the moment at which consciousness begins should be the cutoff point, reasoning that perhaps it's wrong to kill a being if that being has experienced consciousness at some point, because that is a requirement for a sense of personal identity and thus a requirement for that being to have moral value as an end.

(though of course we must keep in mind that since we don't understand consciousness we can't really define a strict cutoff point for when consciousness develops)

If murder is wrong becuase it prevents consciousness from EXTENDING into the future, then there's nothing wrong with killing a fetus before it is conscious, as you can't extend something that doesn't exist.

I agree, it will take some more research before we know when to cut off, right now maybe 4 or 5 weeks since brain development doesn't even start before then, but we'll get more information sometime in the future. Right now I see 23 weeks as a good compromise.

Just because something isn't conscious it's okay to destroy it...?

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Oct 3 2014 04:37pm

I don't believe in abortions, I think they are cowardly and selfish unless it's done to save the mothers life or if shes the victim of a rape/assault.


But I don't think I have to right to legislate what she does with her body

I don't think women have the right to destroy an innocent soul, which was caused to come into existence because of her.

Not just women, anyone. All life deserves a chance.

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Oct 3 2014 04:40pm

I think where they are is that if it has never experienced consciousness then it might not be considered murder.

I was going to throw an example out there for you I've been under anesthesia once for 18 hours straight and once for near 10 hours and the only conscious thoughts or memories I have are the Dr. putting the mask on
my face and the icu recovery nurse smiling at me when I came to. So those were hours that were completely lost to me.

As you will never know what it's like to be raped and impregnated ....your opinion is quite invalid, as is mine...and any other mans

Who cares about my opinion, it's irrelevant. What's relevant is who are we to judge and take and destroy an innocent life that HAD NO choice to want to come into this world?

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Oct 3 2014 05:12pm

life doesn't imply human. Life is bacteria as well.

There is a HUGE difference between regular bacteria and bacteria that is infused with DNA to create a moral being (or a human, for naturalists).

This post was edited by HighschoolTurd on Oct 3 2014 05:19pm