'Viability' issue outside realm of science

In response to Mr. William Raymond's Feb. 14 editorial on the beginning of life: Science does not teach anyone. Scientists do, and scientists are fallible student/servants of philosophy as is everyone. A scientist's worldview inescapably comes to the fore when discussing ethical matters. Thus, scientists do not necessarily have more objectivity than others simply because they are scientists.

Mr. Raymond's viability argument regarding human life rises/falls on a dualistic view of humans (i.e. the separation of personhood from biology, a mind/body dichotomy). A key question is whether or not the body of a human is inseparable from, or is a core part of, what it means to be a person. This is a matter of theology and philosophy, outside the realm of science.

Those who believe that all humans are made in the image of God will behave accordingly. Conversely, those who believe that there is no God and humans are not intrinsically different from other animals (a mere rearrangement of molecules, etc.) will also behave and construct laws accordingly as is evident in Mr. Raymond's letter.

Norman Suire

Elgin