General Medicine

» tinuviel - Stem cell research

I do remember reading that point, and I chose not to argue about souls for a reason. The existence of a soul is not something that people can prove. If souls exist, then only God can tell how and when he confers these--or if he even has to *confer* these at all.

It might be that personality is what people refer to as a "soul"--and we do know that at least some of that can be attributed to one's genes.

The argument against ensoulment might be better used in an attempt to disprove the existence of a soul. I don't think it works well in speaking against the embryo as a life (that is, as being alive and possessing life.) Having an argument about ensoulment as it regards twins would be fruitless, in my opinion, since the very subject (the soul) cannot be probed. This would be where philosophy comes into the picture.

But I don't want to evade the question. I think if you do argue that soul conference happens at conception, then you've got a problem when it comes to the issue of twinning. But I wouldn't argue that (on the side of those who believe in soul conference). I think such an argument is a little infantile. I mean, I am conservative (as you can tell)--but I do believe that some level of open-mindedness is warranted in this life.

Let me know if I've left anything out.

-- posted by tinuviel