User Tag List

First 8161718

Results 171 to 177 of 177

  1. #171
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    My opinion is that all humans should be terminated upon birth.
    The ant colony to which I defer shall elaborate further. But you won't be able to hear them, so I'll recite their teachings.

    In my many bouts with my brain I've discovered it's much more fun to watch the ants.
    They live for some time, all the while carrying food to be digested by the queen.

    If time were a spatial metric, an any colony would have as many units as a person.
    Hurray for circulation, expansion and reproduction.
    These three are still the same.

    An ant colony is a Human is a Deck of Cards.
    Which game will you play? I know everything from fifty-two pickup and magnifying glass melting.

    Or what about drugs?
    Perhaps instead we ought to let the infant kill itself.



    If you know what I'm talking about raise your hand.

  2. #172
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Duh.







    Yes, I have clearly explained why. Your tests are overly simple and we're measuring something complex like cognitive ability. There are bound to be mistakes. How can I be more clear than that?.
    They need not be complex because the mind of an infant is very simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    You've already conceded to my point anyway, you just don't remember it as conceding to my point. You'd rather dismiss me as "one of those idiot feelers". Look at your last few pages of posts. You've been talking about different things because I've shown parts of your original argument to be flawed?.
    ???



    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Yes, that is how your responded. But now you're admitting that your theory doesn't work in all cases. I agree, [b]making it illegal to kill babies is an ethical approximation. But so is your solution.?.
    There may be some mistakes here and there, but that is okay, as no plan is perfect.








    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Hmm, well if you actually read those words, the first quote says that the parents get to choose whether or not to kill their children. The second quote says that the state gets to choose. So is it the parents or the state? Surely you can see the inconsistency.?.
    At first I have maintained that because the children are property, they belong to someone. They could either be private property or state property, as is the case with all property.

    Then I have argued that for the sake of maintaining democratic regimes and the regimes of the open society in general, it is better that they be private property. I did not maintain that they should be the property of the state.




    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Who cares if it's up to the parent? Do you not understand economics? If someone pays, it means they're not paying for something else, which mean they're not stimulating the economy in other ways..?.
    It will be much cheaper to kill the child than to support him for many years.



    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    The mistakes are few and minor with your theory, and they're few and minor with making it illegal to kill babies. They are both flawed. You have not shown yours to be better or more efficient. From my understanding, it looks like a much worse option, just from an economic standpoint...?.
    Its economically more efficient because its cheaper, the money will be devoted to more constructive purposes. Secondly, the higher satisfaction of the parents will boost morale in the society which likely will lead to positive consequences.




    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Right, but how can you show that this outweighs the mistakes your theory makes? At this point, it just sounds like an opinion....?.
    I do not see the mistakes. You only said there were mistakes, but did not point out clearly what they were.






    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    Mistakes are certainly inevitable; your theory applies to ALL children. Do you know how many millions that is? Are you saying that your error rate is as small as one in a million or so?....?.
    In our methodology mistakes are not inevitable. If we execute it as planned, there should not be many errors. But of course, there is human error, therefore we will err some of the time at least. But that is okay, as the losses which will ensue as a result of this will be few.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #173
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    I do not see the mistakes. You only said there were mistakes, but did not point out clearly what they were.
    I said there are potential ways the test wouldn't work. You agreed. And yet now you say there are no mistakes.

    ...

    Are you serious?

    I'm done.

  4. #174
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    I said there are potential ways the test wouldn't work. You agreed. And yet now you say there are no mistakes.

    ...

    Are you serious?

    I'm done.
    Yes, there will be mistakes as a result of us using this method. Though this does not mean that using the method is in itself a mistake.

    Just like you may make mistakes at work, yet hiring you may not be a mistake because the good things about having you around overshadow the impact of those mistakes you make.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  5. #175
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Dissonance gave up?
    That's not very J of you...

  6. #176
    Dali
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    BW, your intent here is to enlighten pro-choice folks about the insignificant difference between a birthed and a yet-unbirthed baby, no?

    And thus everyone getting all upset at you should instead turn their emotions upon themselves and examine their personal abortion stance?
    +1

    Swift's A Modest Proposal popped into my head as I was halfway through the post.

  7. #177
    Broud Balestinian G-Virus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    2
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Infanticide or killing recently born children is considered a crime because such an entity is regarded as a human being.

    Abortion, however is not considered a crime because a fetus is not regarded as a human being.

    What is a human being? Quite obviously the psychological sense of self or the capacity for an intellectual conception of the world is the essence of man. An infant does not have a mind of a human. He is in closer affinity with most animals than humans for this reason.

    Because an infant is not a human, he ought not to be granted the right to life and is therefore the property of the state or his biological parents. It is up to one of the two to decide whether the infant should live or die.

    The fact that he has potential to become a human being is irrelevant because law by definition deals with entities that are and not entities that could be.

    A normal child may be dispensed with until he has reached the age of 2, or clear-cut psychological functioning. A child afflicted with mental retardation may be killed until he has reached the age of 5.

    Thus in summary, one should not be awarded the basic human rights until one becomes human or acquires a psychological sense of self, until then he is to be regarded as property of those who do have such a sense of self.
    Mr. Bluewing,

    Before one even begins to argue your point, the debate over abortion must be resolved. These two ideas are not detached in and of themselves. The debate over whether abortion is morally justifiable, if such a thing exists, is still a hotly contested ethical topic and has yet to be determined. The idea that the murder of anything not inherently human can be justified is counter productive to the progression and advancement of human society in general. One can not merely discount the potential benefit of any unborn soul for we as a species do not boast the capacity of looking into the future. By removing possible potential, we are directly impairing our societal advancement in the future. Just because something is not realized at the moment, does not mean it will not be. To conclude, for your argument to even have the mere semblances of validity, you must argue beyond the shadow of a doubt that the destruction of potential life will garner us as species more benefit than harm. Since no rationale being can possibly prove this, one can not be in a position to justify there actions from a moral standpoint. They can only argue that there action was out of perceived benefit to themselves. Can perceived benefits alone be rationale enough to move ahead with such a monumentous action?
    Seek freedom and become captive of your desires, seek discipline and find your liberty.

    "If you go looking for something in particular, your chances of finding it are very bad, because of all the things in the world, you're only looking for one of them. If you go looking for anything at all, your chances of finding it are very good, because of all the things in the world, you're sure to find some of them."

Similar Threads

  1. Legality of Infanticide
    By Beorn in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 04-19-2015, 02:00 PM
  2. Type based on choice of historical quotes.
    By Jack Flak in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 08:41 PM
  3. on Philosophy of Education
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 11-20-2008, 06:12 PM
  4. [ENTP] On: Overassessment of entp savvy
    By entropie in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10-27-2008, 08:56 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