Re: [asa] scientific fact vs. ideology?

From: Gregory Arago <gregoryarago@yahoo.ca>
Date: Sat Mar 21 2009 - 13:45:35 EDT

The issue of whether human embryos *are* 'living people' or when they *become* 'living people' is crucial; many on the list were and are discussing 'personhood' too. If you want to conveniently ignore those who study personality, Don, and all of the writings, studies, discoveries and insights that have been made, then you do so at your own waste. It would be as if you wanted to argue that engineered structures have nothing to do with human beings, because of some objectivist, isolationist ideology that rejects unity of science, instead to focus on specialisation and fragmentation than general or integrative understanding. I'm reassured to see that not all discussants on this list would choose to do that.
 
- Gregory

--- On Thu, 3/19/09, Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
From: Don Nield <d.nield@auckland.ac.nz>
Subject: Re: [asa] scientific fact vs. ideology?
To: gregoryarago@yahoo.ca
Cc: asa@calvin.edu, "David Campbell" <pleuronaia@gmail.com>, gmurphy10@neo.rr.com
Received: Thursday, March 19, 2009, 12:51 AM
I would ask Gregory why there is need in this context to consult people who
study personality professionally? We are discussing embryos, not living people,
so the social sciences are irrelevant here.
Don __________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now at http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Mar 21 13:46:16 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 21 2009 - 13:46:17 EDT