CONTROVERSIES ON THE BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE - SCIENCE AND RELIGION CLOSER AND CLOSER.
CONTROVERSIES ON THE BEGINNING OF HUMAN LIFE - SCIENCE AND RELIGION CLOSER AND CLOSER.
复制标题
关于人类生命起源的争论——科学与宗教越来越接近。
DOI：
10.5005/sar-1-1-2-23
复制
发表时间：
2021
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Lara Spalldi Barišić
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Kurjak;Lara Spalldi Barišić
在现代生命伦理学、科学和哲学中最具争议的话题之一是个体生命的起源。在这场似乎永无止境的辩论中，受到人类生殖技术进步的强烈刺激，科学数据与假设、哲学思想和人文问题之间的综合已经成为处理伦理、法律和社会问题的必要条件。此外，在这一领域，有一种诱惑，要求科学在观点和信仰之间做出选择，这两者相互抵消。人类生命何时开始的问题需要不同形式的知识的基本帮助。在这里，我们涉及到科学与宗教之间的结合点，这需要仔细探索。现代生命伦理学和科学强烈关注对人类生命存在的两端（出生和死亡）的尊重，但其他科学(例如：哲学、技术、心理学、社会学、法律和政治)从不同的角度考虑人类生命的开端。然而，像这样的生物伦理话题不能只从一个角度来看待(例如：生物学的、哲学的或宗教的)，因为结论可能不够好或不够还原。我们应当充分考虑这个现实的丰富性：一个胚胎给生物学家和遗传学家提供了研究的材料，但因为我们谈论的是人类生命的开端，所以它需要哲学人类学的研究，需要与神学的对抗；为了保护它，我们必须包括道德和法律。在体验和调查社会行为时，必须包括其他学科，如医学史和社会学。人的生命何时应该受到法律保护这个问题很难回答。在受孕的时候？在植入的时候？在出生的时候？在所有国家（爱尔兰和列支敦士登除外），司法考虑都以罗马法为基础。罗马民法规定，胎儿在出生时或出生时都有权利。很少有国家认同人的人格在受孕时开始的定义。大多数法律不承认体外（即受精后14天内）人类胚胎的法律地位。因此，即使在没有法律权利的情况下，也不可否认，胚胎是人类生命的开端，是人类家庭的一员。因此，无论采取何种态度，每个国家都必须审查哪些做法符合对人类遗传物质的尊严和安全的尊重。人类生命何时开始以及如何定义生命的问题，只能通过历史、哲学、医学和宗教的内在联系来回答。在这个微妙的哲学领域，科学和形而上学的能力之间的界限并不容易确定。这条线的画在很大程度上取决于一个人的基本哲学观。人类生命的起点总是被不同的个人、群体、文化和宗教信仰所不同地看待。在民主制度中，总是至少有两个方面，只有当多数人认识到没有少数人，民主本身就失去了，中间才会站得住脚跟。而少数人则必须认识到，最好的机会在于用理性和深思熟虑来说服，而不是狂热。
One of the most controversial topics in modern bioethics, science, and philosophy is the beginning of individual human life. In the seemingly endless debate, strongly stimulated by recent technologic advances in human reproduction, a synthesis between scientific data and hypothesis, philosophical thought, and issues of humanities has become a necessity to deal with ethical, juridical, and social problems. Furthermore, in this field there is a temptation to ask science to choose between opinions and beliefs, which neutralize one another. The question of when human life begins requires the essential aid of different forms of knowledge. Here we become involved in the juncture between science and religion, which needs to be carefully explored. Modern bioethics and science are strongly concerned for the respect of human life at both ends of its existence (birth and death), but other sciences (eg. Philosophy, technology, psychology, sociology, law, and politics) consider the beginning of human life according to different points of view. However, bioethical topics like this one cannot be treated from only one perspective (eg. Biological, philosophical, or religious) because conclusions might be not good enough or reductive. This reality should be regarded in all its richness: An embryo gives a biologist and a geneticist substance for consideration, but because we are talking about the beginning of human life, it requires philosophical-anthropological consideration and confrontation with theology; in its protection we have to include ethics and law. In experiencing and investigating social behavior, other disciplines, such as the history of medicine and sociology, have to be included. It is hard to answer the question when human life should be legally protected. At the time of conception? At the time of implantation? At the time of birth? In all countries (except Ireland and Liechtenstein) juridical considerations are based on Roman law. Roman civil law says that the fetus has right when it is born or if it is born-nasciterus. Few countries agree with definition of beginning of human personality at the time of conception. The majority does not grant legal status to the human embryo in vitro (i.e., during the 14 days after fertilization). Thus, even in the absence of legal rights, there is no denying that the embryo constitutes the beginning of human life, a member of the human family. Therefore, whatever the attitude, every country has to examine which practices are compatible with the respect of that dignity and the security of human genetic material.The question when a human life begins and how to define it, could be answered only through the inner-connecting pathways of history, philosophy, medical science and religion. It has not been easy to determine where to draw the fine line between the competence of science and methaphysics in this delicate philosophical field. To a large extent the drawing of this line depends on one's fundamental philosophical outlook. The point at which human life begins will always be seen differently by different individuals, groups, cultures, and religious faiths. In democracy there are always at least two sides, and the center holds only when the majority realizes that without a minority democracy itself is lost. The minority in turn must realize its best chance lies in persuasion by reason and thoughtfulness rather than fanaticism.