Myrtok Posted December 17, 2010 Report Share Posted December 17, 2010 (edited) The scientific answer to this is obvious. I'm interested in the view of Objectivists. Ayn Rand distinguishes humans from animals by the humans' ability to choose life, as opposed to living by instinct. Babies live wholly by instinct just like animals. The age of 7 is the classically accepted "age of reason," and from my personal observations of children, I think that is a fairly accurate average for when a child gains the ability to choose life rather than simply live by instinct. Of course, this ability is gained by degrees, not necessarily all at once in an epiphany. The only way that I can see to classify babies as human would be to grant them a special exception based on their future potential of becoming human. However, I'm aware that Objectivism, in other areas at least, rejects the equivalance of potenialities with realities. What is the tack taken by Rand or other Oists? Edited December 17, 2010 by Myrtok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.