Splitting Hairs on Pregnancy
Speaking of definitions. There is a hair we can split.
Implantation is the point a female first reacts to the presence of a fertilized egg. Pregnancy tests look for the hormones released at implantation. Add to this the fact that a large number of eggs fail to implant.
A person in hair splitting mode has justification to say pregnancy begins with implantation.
To support this hair splitting, one could note that with in vitro fertilization, the egg is fertilized in a test tube. There is a point when the egg is fertile, but not in the women. Clearly, the women is not pregnant. I wonder if one should say the test tube is pregnant?
Anyway, with hair splitting, you can create a stipulated definition where pregnancy is the period between implantation and birth. Let's stipulate that gestation refers to the period from fertilization to birth. You now have created a wonderful world where gestation and pregnancy mean different things.
With the stipulated definition of pregnancy, you can then argue that aborting an embryo before implantation does not abort the pregnancy. Yes, it aborts the gestation, but not the pregnancy. Aren't stipulated definitions wonderful?
The problem is that when you use stipulated definitions in public discourse, is that you have to be extremely clear that you are using stipulated definitions. If you use the word "pregnancy" and the audience is thinking "gestation" then you are not communicating. When you are pulling such a trick intentionally to manipulate an argument, then you are pulling an underhanded trick to thwart communication and stop communication.
If you use a stipulated definition, you have to be completely certain that others understand your stipulated definition.
Anyway, I decided to check on the current definition of "pregnancy". I checked several sources including Websters, Britannica, Dictionary.com and older printed dictionaries. Each of the sources I checked had pregnancy listed as from fertilization to birth. The really surprising thing is that the current definition at Wikipedia says "Pregnancy is the carrying of one or more embryos or fetuses by female mammals, including humans, inside their bodies."
Perhaps this isn't surprising. Most of the legitimate work on understanding the birth process is by people trying to create life and not by people trying to rid unwanted life.
As a test, I tried changing a sentence on the Wikipedia article that was saying that the opinion that pregnancy begins with fertilisation is a prolife view. The change was reverted within 3 minutes. I've comtemplated adding a link between the Wiki article on Emergency Contraception and the Wiki article on Pregnancy. It appears that someone tried that trick in the past. Not wanting to engage in flame edits, I don't think I will do that.
Implantation is the point a female first reacts to the presence of a fertilized egg. Pregnancy tests look for the hormones released at implantation. Add to this the fact that a large number of eggs fail to implant.
A person in hair splitting mode has justification to say pregnancy begins with implantation.
To support this hair splitting, one could note that with in vitro fertilization, the egg is fertilized in a test tube. There is a point when the egg is fertile, but not in the women. Clearly, the women is not pregnant. I wonder if one should say the test tube is pregnant?
Anyway, with hair splitting, you can create a stipulated definition where pregnancy is the period between implantation and birth. Let's stipulate that gestation refers to the period from fertilization to birth. You now have created a wonderful world where gestation and pregnancy mean different things.
With the stipulated definition of pregnancy, you can then argue that aborting an embryo before implantation does not abort the pregnancy. Yes, it aborts the gestation, but not the pregnancy. Aren't stipulated definitions wonderful?
The problem is that when you use stipulated definitions in public discourse, is that you have to be extremely clear that you are using stipulated definitions. If you use the word "pregnancy" and the audience is thinking "gestation" then you are not communicating. When you are pulling such a trick intentionally to manipulate an argument, then you are pulling an underhanded trick to thwart communication and stop communication.
If you use a stipulated definition, you have to be completely certain that others understand your stipulated definition.
Anyway, I decided to check on the current definition of "pregnancy". I checked several sources including Websters, Britannica, Dictionary.com and older printed dictionaries. Each of the sources I checked had pregnancy listed as from fertilization to birth. The really surprising thing is that the current definition at Wikipedia says "Pregnancy is the carrying of one or more embryos or fetuses by female mammals, including humans, inside their bodies."
Perhaps this isn't surprising. Most of the legitimate work on understanding the birth process is by people trying to create life and not by people trying to rid unwanted life.
As a test, I tried changing a sentence on the Wikipedia article that was saying that the opinion that pregnancy begins with fertilisation is a prolife view. The change was reverted within 3 minutes. I've comtemplated adding a link between the Wiki article on Emergency Contraception and the Wiki article on Pregnancy. It appears that someone tried that trick in the past. Not wanting to engage in flame edits, I don't think I will do that.
posted by y-intercept at 11:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home