Abortion Is a Violation of Burden of Proof
Debate Rounds (3)
Unfortunately, "state of mind" cannot be physically determined. It ignores the fact-value dichotomy, is-ought problem, and naturalistic fallacy. For example, in neuroscience, we induce, rather than deduce, what brainwave patterns coincide with certain attitudes or thoughts. This is done by measuring people who admit to having certain attitudes or thoughts, and then averaging the results throughout a sample.
The problem is this discounts the value of outliers, and assumes that everyone being sampled has an equal attitude or thought in the first place.
Similarly, neuroscientists don't know what to anticipate when evaluating when a preborn becomes cognitive. Typically, they refer to when a brain is formed during a preborn's embryonic period. The problem is we don't know whether or not a "brain" must exist for cognition to function. In fact, if we really want to get technical, even the formation of neural tissue is a "blur" as much as in the rest of biology. The definition of when cells form tissues depends on inducing cohesion from arbitrating how close is close enough for cells to come together to reflect what we identify as a "brain".
This inductive cohesion is where burden of proof is shifted onto the negative. We are demanding that personhood proves itself to us rather than recognizing how personhood is innocent before proven guilty. If personhood exists, it is not obligated to satisfy the judgment of those it didn't consent to assemble with.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.