Guarded Acumen

If you're interested in philosophy, theology and physics, then tag along for my transition to Bluesky:

1. Analytic Philosophy
2. Theology
3. Metaphysics
4. Metaethics
5. Epistemology
6. Physics
7. Cosmology
8. Advanced Mathematics
9. Biblical Studies
10. A.I.

#promosky

An Argument for Atheism from Classical Theism

1: If ¬∃x(x = God), then atheism is true
2: ∀y(∃x(x = y) → Being(y)) (if an individual exists, then it is a being)
3: It is not the case that God is a being
4: ¬∃x(x = God)
5. Therefore, atheism is true

If it is immoral to cause non-life ending impairment to sentient non-human animals for pleasure, then, ceteris paribus, it is immoral to impair them to a higher degree, e.g. life ending impairment for pleasure.

Thoughts? 💭

Consider the Augustinian Principle: that existence is always good. If annihilationism were true, then God would be decreasing the amount of good in the world. But God cannot decrease the amount of good in the world. Therefore, annihilationism is false.

Thoughts? 💭

Why think only an infallible magisterium with free-standing authority can prevent irresolvable, doctrinal disagreement? The scientific community isn't infallible and it doesn't have free-standing authority, but I'll take the scientific community's epistemic credentials any day.

Famous Sayings Formalized in Symbolic Logic

• (∀x ∀y x=y) ∧ (∃x ∃y ([x=x] > [y = y]))

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" — Animal Farm by George Orwell

Famous Sayings Formalized in Symbolic Logic

• ∀p(¬W(p) → ¬S(p))

"He who does not weep does not see" — Les Misérables by Victor Hugo

🤔 For deeper exploration: research mereological debates in philosophy of biology and the nature of biological individuality.

#mereology #philosophy #abortion #prochoice #prolife

The philosophical machinery here isn't just abstract navel-gazing - it shapes how we conceptualize and discuss early human development in both scientific and ethical contexts.

➡️ Key implication: If Interpretation #4 is correct, debates about "when the organism begins" might be based on a faulty premise - assuming there's a singular entity to track from the start.

Under this view, terms like "zygote" and "embryo" are either:

• Plural terms in disguise (referring to cells collectively)
• Convenient fictions we use for practical purposes

🌶️ Interpretation #4: There are no zygotes or early embryos as individual entities at all! They're just convenient fictions, like talking about a "marble collection" as if it were something beyond its constituent marbles.

🔑 Interpretation #3: Building on #2, but with a key difference - the zygote continues to exist alongside the emerging organism, potentially becoming a proper part of it. This suggests coexistence rather than replacement.

Now for the spicy take …

Think of it like an amoeba splitting: the original entity ceases to exist as two new entities emerge. The zygote-to-organism transition would follow similar logic under this second interpretation.

🔑 Interpretation #2: Here, "organism" is a substance sortal - nothing can transition from non-organism to organism. The human organism that emerges is numerically distinct from the preceding zygote, which must cease to exist.

🔑 Interpretation #1: The zygote exists as a distinct entity from its component cells, but "organism" is a phase sortal (like "child" or "adult"). Under this view, the same entity can transition from non-organism to organism during development, just as a child becomes an adult.

The core question: is a zygote/early embryo (1) a distinct entity from its cells, (2) a temporary precursor to an organism, (3) a co-existing entity with an organism, or (4) merely a convenient fiction?

Let's explore each interpretation …

Key terms: a "phase sortal" describes properties that can change while maintaining identity (child→adult), while a "substance sortal" describes essential, unchangeable properties.

This distinction is crucial for understanding zygote-to-organism transitions.

First, some context: we're dealing with fundamental questions about what constitutes an individual entity versus a collection of parts. Think "is a heap of sand one thing or many?" but for embryology. 🤔

What do people really mean when we say a zygote is "just a clump of cells"? This seemingly simple phrase hides at least four distinct philosophical interpretations about the nature of biological identity and emergence.

Let's explore them. 🧵