From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
Subject: Re: A comment on RvW    (personhood)
Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:42:14 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <1992Aug13.163211.13555@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com writes:

> In article <1992Aug13.154730.7261@menudo.uh.edu> HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.) writes:
> > In <1992Aug13.133656.8458@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> decay@cbnewsj.cb.att.com writes:
> > > Point of information back at you.
> > > How are you defining "animal" and "human"?  Unless they lied
> > > to me in bio, humans are animals.  I understand that there are
> > > common usages that separate human from animal, and I think
> >   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > that's where you're driving, but if you're driving there
> >   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > you need to show the rest of us the roadmap.  I think Eric and
> > > Dougie were being stricter in terms of the biological definition.
> >   Bingo, Dean.  That's exactly what *I* was driving at.  I had a feeling E&D
> > were using the strict term, but IMO its best to distinguish between the 
> > common and the technical, and use the common because its more clear (in this 
> > case).  Kinda silly to argue that a sentient thing doesn't deserve "human"
> > rights just cause it's green and has four legs.
> 
> Leaving aside my minor quibbles, I think you need a lint
> remover because there are some serious fuzzballs on your
> definitions.
> 
> Sentience as you use the term is, I think, intended to mean
> somthing more like "self-awareness."  "Sentience," as defined
[lots deleted]

  Yes, that is how I meant it.  I do not disagree with what you have said.  On
the contrary, I even subscribe to the same viewpoint.  My only real grumble 
with the original debate terms was that in using the technically correct 
version, was IMO unfair to the kibitzers, and confusing.  I felt Doug began
using the word "animal" for some emotional point where it did not belong.
Deciding if something is human is fairly easy.  Personhood is the tricky
part, as I use the terms.

> > * Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist!		       *
> 
> Ah, but do you know you exist, and do they know they exist, and
> do they really exist or are they simply a phantasm created by
> some all-powerful deceiver?
> Dean Kaflowitz

  Indeed, for that matter how do I know I'm not just the figment of some all-
powerful (even non-powerful) being's imagination?

AUUUUGGGGHHH! I *hate* this kind of philosophicalness!  :-) 

semper fi,

Jammer Jim Miller 
Texas A&M University '89 and '91
********************************************************************************
* Aggie in Cougarland -- I just work here.				       *
* Speak for my employers?  They don't even know I exist! --Maybe THEY don't!   *
*"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
*             *********************************************		       *
* "Power finds its way to those who take a stand.  Stand up, Ordinary Man."    *
*      ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mark Levine: Triumph 		               *
********************************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.politics.misc