Scott Rae: What Does It Mean To Be Human? - Do The Right Thing

Summary

This video explores the philosophical and ethical implications of personhood, challenging the idea that a person's worth is based on their ability to perform specific functions. The speaker critiques the argument that personhood is contingent on cognitive abilities or responsiveness, emphasizing that personhood is an all-or-nothing quality. The discussion stresses the importance of safeguarding the dignity and rights of every human, regardless of abilities, underlining the belief that all humans are created in God's image and deserve protection. This addresses a critical moral issue surrounding the treatment of individuals with impaired functions.

Takeaways

• 😀 Personhood is not defined by the ability to perform certain functions or tasks.
• 😀 Philosophical debate exists about whether personhood is a 'degraded' property that can fluctuate depending on abilities.
• 😀 A key argument against function-based definitions of personhood is that it implies people who lose abilities could lose their dignity and rights.
• 😀 The concept of personhood must recognize intrinsic dignity, independent of individual capabilities or performance.
• 😀 The speaker critiques the notion that anesthesia or comas could diminish a person's status as a person, emphasizing the all-or-nothing nature of personhood.
• 😀 Philosophical discussions about personhood often miss the importance of recognizing human beings as created in God's image.
• 😀 The ethical implications of defining personhood based on function risk marginalizing people with disabilities or cognitive impairments.
• 😀 Personhood should be affirmed as a fundamental, unchanging attribute, not as something contingent upon a person's performance of specific tasks.
• 😀 The belief that personhood is tied to function leads to moral confusion and undermines the protection of human dignity.
• 😀 Upholding the dignity of every human being, regardless of abilities, is essential to ethical discussions about rights and personhood.

Q & A

What is the central theme of the speaker's argument regarding personhood?

The central theme of the speaker's argument is that personhood should not be based on one's ability to perform certain functions, such as cognitive abilities or consciousness. Instead, personhood is an all-or-nothing concept, rooted in intrinsic dignity that remains intact regardless of an individual's capabilities.

What is meant by personhood being an 'all or nothing' concept?

The speaker argues that personhood is not something that can vary in degree. A person is either fully a person or not, and their rights and dignity are not diminished by the loss of certain abilities or functions.

How does the speaker critique the argument that personhood is based on the ability to perform certain functions?

The speaker critiques this view by pointing out that if personhood were based on functional abilities, individuals who are unable to perform specific functions (such as those in comas or with disabilities) would lose their rights and dignity, which contradicts the idea of inherent human worth.

What philosophical term does the speaker use to describe personhood?

The speaker refers to personhood as not being a 'degreed property.' This means that personhood is not something that exists in varying degrees based on function, but rather is an inherent and indivisible characteristic.

Why does the speaker emphasize the idea of intrinsic dignity in the context of personhood?

The speaker emphasizes intrinsic dignity because they believe that every human being, regardless of their abilities, deserves to be treated with respect and protected under human rights. This dignity is rooted in the belief that humans are created in God's image, which remains constant irrespective of cognitive or physical limitations.

What is the danger of defining personhood based on abilities, according to the speaker?

The danger is that it could lead to the erosion of rights and protections for individuals who lose abilities due to age, disability, or medical conditions. This would undermine the moral and ethical foundation that all humans are equal in dignity.

What example does the speaker use to illustrate the potential confusion in defining personhood?

The speaker uses the example of individuals under general anesthesia, suggesting that if personhood were based on function, these individuals would be considered non-persons temporarily, even though they retain their inherent dignity.

How does the speaker align with Professor George’s views on the topic?

The speaker expresses strong agreement with Professor George, especially in relation to safeguarding the intrinsic dignity of every human being, regardless of their ability to perform certain functions.

What ethical issue does the speaker highlight as a critical area of confusion?

The speaker highlights the confusion between evaluating personhood based on abilities versus recognizing intrinsic dignity as the foundation of human rights, which they believe is central to ethical discussions surrounding personhood and moral protection.

What moral perspective does the speaker promote regarding the rights of individuals with disabilities or diminished abilities?

The speaker promotes the moral perspective that all individuals, regardless of their abilities or cognitive functions, should be afforded the same rights and dignity, as their personhood is not contingent upon the ability to perform certain tasks.