Secular Pro-Life
  • Home
  • About
    • Meet The Team
    • Mission and Vision
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Stances
      • Abortion
      • Religion
      • Contraception
      • The Rape Exception
    • Terms and Conditions
  • Content
    • Index
    • Blog
    • Presentations
      • A Secular Case Against Abortion
      • Building Bridges
      • Deconstructing Three Pro-Choice Myths
      • Overlooked Findings of the Turnaway Study
    • Research
      • Abortion Law and Abortion Rates
      • Abortion Law and Pregnancy Rates
      • Later Abortion
      • Embryonic Hearts
    • Collections
      • For the biology textbook tells me so
      • They can hear you
      • Parents can hear you
      • Our children’s heartbeats
      • Becoming Pro-Life
      • Ask An Atheist
      • LGBTQ and Pro-Life
      • Fixed that meme for you
    • Print Materials
      • 100 Pro-Life Sign Ideas
      • Overview of SPL
      • 3 Reasons to tell people you’re pro-life
      • How to talk (not fight) about abortion
      • Bridges PRC Curriculum
      • FAQ
      • Presentations overview
    • Store
  • Contact
  • Get Involved
    • Why support SPL?
    • Donor Opportunities
    • Volunteer Opportunities
    • Volunteer Survey
    • More Surveys
      • Why do you support SPL?
      • Best and Worst Abortion Arguments
      • “Ask An Atheist” Interview
      • Non-Traditional Pro-Life Survey
      • LGBT Pro-Life Survey
      • Parents experiences with prenatal screening
      • Your experiences with adoption
  • Donate
  • Opt-out preferences
  • Search
  • Menu Menu

Is personhood derived from past, present, or future consciousness?

August 5, 2022/0 Comments/in Personhood, Uncategorized /by Guest Blogger

Today’s post is by Andrew Scherer

I’ve thought a lot about what makes anyone a “person.” Perhaps “personhood” has only ever been a label that humanity has used as a linguistic gate-keeping device in order to justify oppression, cruelty, and the killing of people they do not like and want to eliminate. Can anyone else think of a scenario in which people have debated another’s personhood that didn’t involve justifying a violation of human rights?

At any rate, here is the best definition for “personhood” that I’ve been able to come up with:

Most people acknowledge that humans are bodies and minds (or consciousness), since when the mind dies, we pronounce the person dead. However, the truth must be that a person is a human body with an inherent capability for future consciousness. Let us test this standard:

Is personhood derived from past consciousness? If so, brain-dead people and dead bodies would still be persons. Corpses are not persons because they have no capability for present or future consciousness. Therefore, personhood cannot be derived from past consciousness.

Is personhood derived from present consciousness? If so, sleeping, unconscious, and comatose bodies would not be persons, and it would be acceptable to harm and kill them. If we accept that such bodies are still persons, then we can only conclude that personhood cannot be derived simply from present consciousness. There must be another element.

The only logical conclusion is that personhood is derived from the potential for future consciousness. This explains why a sleeping or unconscious body is a person. We know they will become conscious; therefore, they are persons. It also explains why a comatose person is protected so long as future consciousness is possible. Once doctors determine the body will never wake up, the person is pronounced dead. Therefore, the inherent capability for future consciousness is where personhood must be derived.

How does this standard apply to an unborn human? A zygote obviously has the inherent capability for future consciousness. In fact, future consciousness is guaranteed with natural growth (except in rare cases of abnormalities) unlike a comatose person whose future is often uncertain. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that a zygote is a human person in its very first stage of development and killing it ends the life of a human person.

Why shouldn’t the standard be that a person is a living human body with a brain? Because that standard begs the question, “Why do we value the brain?” We value it because it is the source of consciousness. It’s specifically the capability for future consciousness that grants personhood and protections, not the brain itself.

We would therefore value whatever provides that inherent capability for future consciousness. For an unconscious or comatose person, the source of that future consciousness is the brain along with all of the biological functions and DNA instructions that allow for the brain to repair itself and resume consciousness. For an unborn fetus, it is the biological functions and DNA instructions that provide that inherent capability to develop a brain and keep it running. Either way, that inherently capability for future consciousness exists, and whatever the source is for that capability must therefore be where personhood is derived from.

Because both bodies have the inherent capability for future consciousness, adding the specification of “currently having a living brain” is unnecessary and arbitrary. It’s a distinction without a difference.

[Read more – Personhood based on human cognitive abilities]

Related Posts

Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share on Reddit
  • Share by Mail
https://i0.wp.com/secularprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/2021.09.07-SPL-tweet-brain-dead-people-arent-analogous.jpg?fit=582%2C285&ssl=1 285 582 Guest Blogger https://secularprolife.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/SecularProlife2.png Guest Blogger2022-08-05 05:49:002022-07-28 19:49:44Is personhood derived from past, present, or future consciousness?
0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow via Email

* indicates required

Categories

  • Ableism
  • Abortion pills
  • Administrative
  • Adoption & Foster Care
  • Biology
  • Bodily Rights
  • en español
  • Later Abortion
  • Legislation, laws, & court cases
  • Miscarriage & Pregnancy Loss
  • Personhood
  • Philosophy
  • Pro-Life Demographics
  • Rape Exception
  • Religion
  • Research
  • Speeches, Discussions, Presentations
  • SPL Emails
  • They Can Hear You
  • Top SPL Articles
  • Top SPL Graphics
  • Uncategorized
  • We Asked You Answered
  • Year In Review
  • Your Stories

Archive

It’s crucial that we demonstrate that anyone can–and everyone should–oppose abortion. Thanks to you, we are working to change minds, transform our culture, and protect our prenatal children. Every donation supports our ability to provide nonsectarian, nonpartisan arguments against abortion. Read more details here. Please donate today.

DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
© Copyright 2025 Secular Pro-Life. All rights reserved. Website Design by TandarichGroup

Related Posts

Psychological Criteria for Personhood Have Horrific Implications Life Chat Podcast episode: “Secular Pro-Life: Crucial in the abortion...
Scroll to top
Manage Consent

To provide the best experience, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.

Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage {vendor_count} vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}
Want to receive our email newsletter?

We’d be happy to keep in touch. Subscribe for access to our newsletter and other updates.