2006-07-22 21:54:06 · 9 answers · asked by Smegma Stigma 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Oh yes it is. Being dependent on somebody else or on some other entity apart from yourself doesn't preclude life, only independence and self-sufficiency. Everyday life proves that none of us could survive without others (humans or not). But this fact does not mean we are not alive.
2006-07-22 22:07:09 · answer #1 · answered by jinky 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Without food, any creature will die.
You can grow a human embryo in a test tube, and if you could create an artificial womb you could grown an entire human baby.
I think the question is clearly alluding to another topic which is; At which point in the development do we decide that this creature is now a human with rights granted under law? And that clearly plays into the abortion debate.
I believe the simplest test is if it can survive breathing in open air. But a more morally correct test is, at what point after the nervous system develops do we consider the pain an abortion would cause (the fetus) to be immoral?
Hope you found my response useful.
2006-07-23 05:34:22 · answer #2 · answered by Tomis 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's alive but not living. The same with sperm and eggs. All three forms of matter are alive but not a life. Neither is a physical body that is brain dead. There's more to life than a body.
Consciousness is the key to whether something is living or not.
2006-07-23 11:26:26 · answer #3 · answered by American Spirit 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A 2 year old child cannot live apart from its mother, is it really alive? a3 yr.old? 4? 5? etc.
2006-07-23 05:00:18 · answer #4 · answered by Steph 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we are all pretty much dependent on other people. food, medical things, almost everything u cannot do or produce on your own. we are all connected, its all economy. but i know what u mean, and somehow u are right. the woman "made" the baby, she has to care for it, buy stuff, feed it, therefore she should have the right to do "the opposite of making it". but i don't kow if thats true. its still a baby, a human being, therefore there should always be a solution.
2006-07-23 05:43:54 · answer #5 · answered by rotacka0687 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure it's alive. In the same sense that your kidneys are alive. You can take'em out and sit'em on a table and they'll die, but if you take'em out and put'em in someone else's body, in the right spot, they'll live.
2006-07-23 05:29:37 · answer #6 · answered by ricothe3rd 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well - i have a nice theory - u see - When it's created ... maybe mother put on it some kind of additional information need of it to create it's imaginations and look at all... maybe more ... noone can say for sure for now ...
2006-07-23 05:03:10 · answer #7 · answered by Sun Sonic 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is alive. Think about symBIOses.
Th
2006-07-23 05:04:18 · answer #8 · answered by Thermo 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no but it can be
2006-07-23 05:00:55 · answer #9 · answered by Tudor M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋