User Tag List

First 5678 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 72

  1. #61
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Just that the anti-abortion label is unnecessary, and a little redundant. I get your stance though.
    In the spirit of ironic redundancy, I am again compelled to restate that I'm not Pro-Choice.

  2. #62
    Senior Member Feops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Posts
    829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JocktheMotie View Post
    Arguing over timetables and such things is irrelevant, and is simply a search for a moral/ethical excuse.
    You're coming from the perspective that once an egg is fertilized there can be no right answer, only less wrong (and morally palatable) answers, making any opinion that discusses timing wrong to some degree.

    Unfortunately this is still an opinion.

    I'll take myself as an example. I've already put down a 12 week safe mark as my own take. I've cited this because I don't consider a human to be an individual until self-awareness is attained. How then, am I excusing myself if I do not think of the fetus as a human individual before that point? It isn't a moral gray area to me, it's more or less identical to denying an unfertilized egg its natural process via birth control and condoms.

  3. #63
    Senior Member professor goodstain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7~7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feops View Post
    You're coming from the perspective that once an egg is fertilized there can be no right answer, only less wrong (and morally palatable) answers, making any opinion that discusses timing wrong to some degree.

    Unfortunately this is still an opinion.

    I'll take myself as an example. I've already put down a 12 week safe mark as my own take. I've cited this because I don't consider a human to be an individual until self-awareness is attained. How then, am I excusing myself if I do not think of the fetus as a human individual before that point? It isn't a moral gray area to me, it's more or less identical to denying an unfertilized egg its natural process via birth control and condoms.
    You are an individual. You have self awareness. At one point in your life you were a fetus.
    everyone uses every function about evenly. take NE for example. if there are those who don't use it much, then why are there such massive amounts of people constantly flowing through Wallmart with 20 items or less?

  4. #64
    Senior Member Feops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Posts
    829

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by professor goodstain View Post
    You are an individual. You have self awareness. At one point in your life you were a fetus.
    So? At one point in my life I was an unfertilized egg and sperm. If my parents had used a condom, or my mom been on contraceptives, I wouldn't have been born.

  5. #65
    Senior Member professor goodstain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7~7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feops View Post
    So? At one point in my life I was an unfertilized egg and sperm. If my parents had used a condom, or my mom been on contraceptives, I wouldn't have been born.
    You don't exist either? i thought i was the only one.
    everyone uses every function about evenly. take NE for example. if there are those who don't use it much, then why are there such massive amounts of people constantly flowing through Wallmart with 20 items or less?

  6. #66
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    Do you really think a fetus at any stage of gestation is self-aware? I don't even think a newborn baby is self-aware.
    The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
    -anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii

  7. #67
    Senior Member Feops's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INTx
    Posts
    829

    Default

    Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

    Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.

    Edit: My perspective can be simply put as "I think, therefore I am". Someone lives once they can think and dies once they cannot. The body is able to survive without higher level thought to a degree (as a fetus, or as a vegetable) but they aren't really human at those points. Their unique spark is not present. This ties heavily in my disbelief in anything resembling a soul and my assumption that this one life and this one mind is all a person ever gets.

  8. #68
    Senior Member professor goodstain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7~7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feops View Post
    Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

    Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.
    If you do exist, did you exist at the point of the sperm touching the egg or somewhere thereafter? 99and44ths of one hundred% of the time the "thereafter" only happens once the sperm touches the egg.
    everyone uses every function about evenly. take NE for example. if there are those who don't use it much, then why are there such massive amounts of people constantly flowing through Wallmart with 20 items or less?

  9. #69
    Strongly Ambivalent Ivy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    24,060

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feops View Post
    Prof: Purple monkey dishwasher.

    Ivy: I wasn't aware that the brain continued to develop its fundamental functions once born. A baby isn't going to remember anything as a fetus, and isn't going to get much practice walking around, but the bits for memory and motion are there. At some point in development whatever sparks awareness is set in motion even if without reference to really ponder it. Neurology isn't to the point where we can identify when each system in the brain really fires up, especially something as vague as consciousness, but we can identify when brain activity as a whole starts.

    Edit: My perspective can be simply put as "I think, therefore I am". Someone lives once they can think and dies once they cannot. The body is able to survive without higher level thought to a degree (as a fetus, or as a vegetable) but they aren't really human at those points. Their unique spark is not present. This ties heavily in my disbelief in anything resembling a soul and my assumption that this one life and this one mind is all a person ever gets.
    Yeah, apparently we just have different definitions of "self-awareness." Which is a common issue in these discussions that leads to people talking past one another.
    The one who buggers a fire burns his penis
    -anonymous graffiti in the basilica at Pompeii

  10. #70
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheLastMohican;[B
    581663If accepted for legal purposes, this argument would have some interesting implications for the procedures of abortion. [/B]It would be legal to remove a fetus from the womb, but not to kill it directly (especially not when it is capable of breathing on its own). That could necessitate some strange practices, but it would, at least in my opinion, make the legalization of abortion philosophically consistent. The basic rule is that we are not allowed to kill children, but we are not required to nurture them, either. It gives us the simple freedom to keep to ourselves.

    Thoughts?
    Interesting implication in terms of parental responsibility as well. Because then, by this proposition, it would be completely within a parent's legal right to neglect his/her child (i.e., not feed, clothe, etc) and not be persecuted for it. Right?

Similar Threads

  1. Pussy Riot, the Virgin Mary and the Statue of Liberty
    By Mole in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 08-22-2012, 06:26 PM
  2. the ethics of voting
    By Z Buck McFate in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 07-12-2011, 10:01 AM
  3. The Ethics of MBTI and Enneagram
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-06-2011, 11:28 PM
  4. Fair Play and the ethics of sports...
    By Blackmail! in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-22-2009, 03:23 PM
  5. The Ethics of Probability: A Poker Metaphor for Faith and Ethics
    By simulatedworld in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-17-2008, 08:00 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO