• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is a single celled human zygote an 'organism'?

Is a single celled human zygote an 'organism'?

  • Yes, a single celled zygote is in fact an organism

    Votes: 43 79.6%

  • No, a single celled zygote is not in fact an organism

    Votes: 11 20.4%
  • Total voters
    54
At this point, I'd say its worthless to stay subscribed to this thread.
 
repeter said:
Thats due to the direct failings of a participant. If you cannot abide by the rules without having someone babysit you, just leave. No one wants to waste anymore time on you.
Click to expand...

Pot, kettle, black my friend.

I started this thread,... It means little to me that a few holdouts aren't satisfied with the poll results and are incapable of convincing others that we should deny that a zygote is in fact an organism.

You are invited to leave anytime,... if you don't like it

:2wave:
 
Chuz Life said:
No,.. To your point that we are not going to agree on the meaning of words like "life" "zygote" "organism", etc,...

How is it that you think we are going to suddenly agree on the relevant definition of the word "human?"
Click to expand...
We aren't.

But that doesn't matter.
 
phildozer9121 said:
Again,

After the food source of the egg is exhausted, it ends up as just a cluster of cells. It can't take in its own food. it can't metabolize, so it can't grow, ergo, it's not an organism.

Just like when your skin cells (which we have all agreed are not organisms) can't grow if they don't have energy.
Click to expand...

It is not true that a zygote cannot take in food. It does so before implantation by taking in endometrial secretions.
 
I'm here again,... Ian.

Now,... what point is it (again) that you feel I haven't adrdressed?
 
Chuz Life said:
I'm here again,... Ian.

Now,... what point is it (again) that you feel I haven't adrdressed?
Click to expand...
Thanks for responding.

I came into this thread at post #95. See that post for most of the details; it's too long to quote here.

You didn't really respond to it, and I had to remind you about it in post #158. Seeing as it's a fairly good summary, I'll quote it here:
iangb said:
The dictionary says that an organism is an individual which is 'capable of independent existence'. The definition of viability says that a zygote is not capable of independent existence.
Furthermore, the definition of the placenta says that the ZEF is 'a single unit' (united) with the mother, microchimerism shows that the ZEF exchanges cells with the mother (making it even less of an individual), the definition of the reproductive cycle says that a new individual is only produced by parturition (birth), and the definition of a zygote itself says that the single cell 'develops into' an organism, implying that it is not already an organism (because if this was not the case, the entire definition would be grammatically redundant).
Click to expand...

You continued to ignore most of it, and you last comment on the issue was post #183, in which you said the following:
Chuz said:
I'm letting the dicionary stuff fester,... for as long as it takes for me to scribe the post I think necessary to say what i want to say.

No hurries,... no worries.
Click to expand...
After this point, you didn't comment on the topic again.

So - what haven't you addressed? You haven't addressed the fact that four dictionary definitions and a cited wikipedia link (read: one with the appropriate citations) directly contradict your claims that a zygote is an organism. To summarise them here:
  • A zygote is not capable of biological independence - one of the qualifiers for being an organism.
  • A zygote is not the end product of the reproductive cycle; as this is the process by which a new individual/organism is created, this implies that a zygote is not yet an organism.
  • A zygote is united ('formed into a single whole') with the mother, both semantically (dictionary link to 'placenta') and biologically (microchimerism).
  • A zygote is described as 'developing into' an organism, which strongly implies it is not yet one.

That's what you haven't addressed.
 
iangb said:
Thanks for responding.

I came into this thread at post #95. See that post for most of the details; it's too long to quote here.

You didn't really respond to it, and I had to remind you about it in post #158. Seeing as it's a fairly good summary, I'll quote it here:

You continued to ignore most of it, and you last comment on the issue was post #183, in which you said the following:
After this point, you didn't comment on the topic again.


So - what haven't you addressed? You haven't addressed the fact that four dictionary definitions and a cited wikipedia link (read: one with the appropriate citations) directly contradict your claims that a zygote is an organism. To summarise them here:
  • A zygote is not capable of biological independence - one of the qualifiers for being an organism.
  • A zygote is not the end product of the reproductive cycle; as this is the process by which a new individual/organism is created, this implies that a zygote is not yet an organism.
  • A zygote is united ('formed into a single whole') with the mother, both semantically (dictionary link to 'placenta') and biologically (microchimerism).
  • A zygote is described as 'developing into' an organism, which strongly implies it is not yet one.
That's what you haven't addressed.
Click to expand...

Dude,.. I'm not about to start reading,... nor writing a book on this.

If you want a response from me,... you are going to have to boil it down.... or break it up into pieces.
 
...that's the purpose of the four bullet points? All you need are those, and the contents of post#95 for the more detailed version.

The bullet points state things which oppose your claim. Post #95 provides the evidence for those things, should you need it.

It's all there - and saying you don't want to respond because there's too much of it is just a positive testament.
 
Chuz Life said:
Dude,.. I'm not about to start reading,... nor writing a book on this.

If you want a response from me,... you are going to have to boil it down.... or break it up into pieces.
Click to expand...
Just wondering, but are you partially channeling NP?

So many periods...
 
organism - definition of organism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

or·gan·ism (ôrg-nzm)
n.
1. An individual form of life, such as a plant, animal, bacterium, protist, or fungus; a body made up of organs, organelles, or other parts that work together to carry on the various processes of life.
2. A system regarded as analogous in its structure or functions to a living body: the social organism.
Click to expand...

A computer is a system. It has a structure analogous to those in a living body. If computers have a sort of "birth", "lifespan" and ultimately a "death", and if it is perfectly fine for me to take my computer and destroy it in whatever way I see fit. Is it fine for a woman to do the same thing to a zygote? Or are we only using the definitions which match whatever it is we want? ;)
 
Last edited:
The Mark said:
Just wondering, but are you partially channeling NP?

So many periods...
Click to expand...

It's a type of punctuation called an "elipsis."

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis"]Ellipsis[/ame] (plural ellipses; from the Greek: ἔλλειψις, élleipsis, "omission") is a mark or series of marks that usually indicate an intentional omission of a word or a phrase from the original text. An ellipsis can also be used to indicate a pause in speech, an unfinished thought, or, at the end of a sentence, a trailing off into silence (aposiopesis) (apostrophe and elipsis mixed). The ellipsis calls for a slight pause in speech.
The most common form of an ellipsis is a row of three periods or full stops (...) or pre-composed triple-dot glyph (…). The usage of the em dash (—) can overlap the usage of ellipsis.
The triple-dot punctuation mark is also called a suspension point, points of ellipsis, periods of ellipsis, or colloquially, dot-dot-dot.

I don't generally think about it before using it.

When I'm typing and actually take a pause or have another related thought,... <--- I indicate it like that.
 
Last edited:
iangb said:
  • A zygote is not capable of biological independence - one of the qualifiers for being an organism.
  • A zygote is not the end product of the reproductive cycle; as this is the process by which a new individual/organism is created, this implies that a zygote is not yet an organism.
  • A zygote is united ('formed into a single whole') with the mother, both semantically (dictionary link to 'placenta') and biologically (microchimerism).
  • A zygote is described as 'developing into' an organism, which strongly implies it is not yet one.
That's what you haven't addressed.
Click to expand...

I've decided to take these questions one at a time in each their own thread,... so that others may join in and to (hopefully) eliminate some congestion.
 
Chuz Life said:
It's a type of punctuation called an "elipsis."

Ellipsis (plural ellipses; from the Greek: ἔλλειψις, élleipsis, "omission") is a mark or series of marks that usually indicate an intentional omission of a word or a phrase from the original text. An ellipsis can also be used to indicate a pause in speech, an unfinished thought, or, at the end of a sentence, a trailing off into silence (aposiopesis) (apostrophe and elipsis mixed). The ellipsis calls for a slight pause in speech.
The most common form of an ellipsis is a row of three periods or full stops (...) or pre-composed triple-dot glyph (…). The usage of the em dash (—) can overlap the usage of ellipsis.
The triple-dot punctuation mark is also called a suspension point, points of ellipsis, periods of ellipsis, or colloquially, dot-dot-dot.

I don't generally think about it before using it.

When I'm typing and actually take a pause or have another related thought,... <--- I indicate it like that.
Click to expand...
I am aware of the usage and name.

The comma threw me off.

I usually see it with simply three dots, or in some cases, with more, to indicate a longer pause.

And, I was trying for a little humor.
 
The Mark said:
I am aware of the usage and name.

The comma threw me off.

I usually see it with simply three dots, or in some cases, with more, to indicate a longer pause.

And, I was trying for a little humor.
Click to expand...

The coma threw you off,... so you asked,.. "why so many periods?"

Riiiiight.
 
Orion said:
It's important to note though that any cell with a nucleus is still part of a holistic system. Even though we can examine a zygote's nature separately, in nature it cannot be separate from the body if it is to continue living. The same goes for any cell in the body, any tissue, or any organ.

So if you're looking at the zygote you also have to view it in relation to the rest of the body. As a cell it needs the body to live and cannot be apart from it for any meaningful amount of time.

Which in turn sort of answers the question. The zygote can't be a human organism if it's dead or separate from the body; it can't be put into a non-human organism to live because it will be attacked; the only place it can live is in-utero, in a human. That to me makes it a human organism.
Click to expand...


Hmmm.. I take issue with this. A ordinary human cell, like that of hair, or skin, is not unique. A Zygote is unique. It may require energy and sustenance, but it is very unique, and an individual by all meaningful ways. One might liken a zygote to a parasite in some ways.


Tim-
 
Hicup said:
Hmmm.. I take issue with this. A ordinary human cell, like that of hair, or skin, is not unique. A Zygote is unique. It may require energy and sustenance, but it is very unique, and an individual by all meaningful ways. One might liken a zygote to a parasite in some ways.


Tim-
Click to expand...

Can I ask why you are reviving a thread that has been dead for nearly 11 months?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Can I ask why you are reviving a thread that has been dead for nearly 11 months?
Click to expand...

LOL Wow, I didn't even notice that. It was weird, I saw it in the Abortion thread at the top, so I commented? I had no idea? That was spooky.. :)

Edit: Now it's gone? Is someone having a little fun? I swear it was right at the top of the Abortion thread?????


Tim-
 
Last edited:
Hicup said:
LOL Wow, I didn't even notice that. It was weird, I saw it in the Abortion thread at the top, so I commented? I had no idea? That was spooky.. :)


Tim-
Click to expand...

At the TOP?!!! Weird. You must have clicked something with the pages, and went to several pages back. Eh, it's OK. Continue.
 
Hicup said:
Hmmm.. I take issue with this. A ordinary human cell, like that of hair, or skin, is not unique. A Zygote is unique. It may require energy and sustenance, but it is very unique, and an individual by all meaningful ways. One might liken a zygote to a parasite in some ways.


Tim-
Click to expand...

Ah but a human hair is unique from that of a human heart. ;) So basically the human body has lots of unique cellular parts in it...which can include a zygote.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Ah but a human hair is unique from that of a human heart. ;) So basically the human body has lots of unique cellular parts in it...which can include a zygote.
Click to expand...

One human hair is not unique to another. It is the exact same thing. Even human zygotes are unique to each other.


Tim-
 
Hicup said:
One human hair is not unique to another. It is the exact same thing. Even human zygotes are unique to each other.


Tim-
Click to expand...

You're right that human hair is not unique to another (if we are talking about the same body). But we are not talking about the same parts of a body. We're talking about seperate parts, the human hair and the human zygote. As such you would have to compare a hair to say the heart or some other body part in order to maintain continuity.

Also you are right that a human zygote is unique to other zygotes. (except in the case of twinning of course) But then a human hair is unique to another humans hair. Which is why a piece of hair can be used as evidence in a murder trial. ;)
 
Kal'Stang said:
You're right that human hair is not unique to another (if we are talking about the same body). But we are not talking about the same parts of a body. We're talking about seperate parts, the human hair and the human zygote. As such you would have to compare a hair to say the heart or some other body part in order to maintain continuity.

Also you are right that a human zygote is unique to other zygotes. (except in the case of twinning of course) But then a human hair is unique to another humans hair. Which is why a piece of hair can be used as evidence in a murder trial. ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah but it can't grow up and make more hair.. :)


Tim-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom