This conversation is closed.
How would you define being "human"?
This question was sparked by a fellow classmate during Theory of Knowledge. He gave some clarifying examples or lead-ins, which may help you guys understand what I'm asking and guide your answers (not toward one answer hopefully).
My classmate said that there was a kid who had lost part of her brain function, due to an accident. Apparently, they put in some sort of device that simulated that area of her brain that was lost. Broadening this concept, if someone's entire brain was replaced with something inorganic and programmed to such an extent that it was indistinguishable from before the surgery, is that person still human? This naturally leads to the subquestion: are a person's traits, emotions, and opinions the only aspect of his humanity or humanness?
After thinking about your response to that situation, what if we flipped the situation? Now we have an inorganic body, but an organic brain. Would you still consider this entity to be 'human'? What if the inorganic body had a non-human shape, such as a triangle? This should all lead to the subquestion: how does an entity's appearance affect its humanness?
Now, the last combination of brain and body: a totally inorganic entity that is seems completely human. This obviously would require a bunch of programming and robotics, but I wouldn't say it's outside of the realm of possibilities (and even if it was, it seems like a good thought experiment to narrow down how you would define humanity). This leads to my last subquestion (for now :)): how does an entity's organic nature (was it born or manufactured) affect its humanity?
I have some ideas currently, but am sure I will have to add on, edit, or completely change my theory after I see your guys' responses! As always, feel free to ask clarifying questions.