User Tag List

First 7891011 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 177

  1. #81
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Antisocial one View Post
    Think that thread has one hole.

    Why not kill retarded children as soon it becomes obvious that they are retarded?

    This children will probably never be on the level that takes to be fully functional person.
    Because retarded people will be able to function soundly enough to make decisions in our society. They will simply take longer. Even if that was not the case, your point is not relevant to the thread.
    "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/

  2. #82
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    It is relevant to infanticide in this regard: a small child should not be allowed to make decisions for himself, therefore he does not have human rights. For this reason his interests ought not to be taken in consideration. He can be dispensed with at the will of those who do.
    You know. You refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that the laws are there to protect those incapable of thinking for themselves yet. I've stated that twice with no response, not to mention several other points I've made.

    You want to convince the world that you are so right. Yet, even if anyone acknowledges your points as being right in this sense or that, you refuse to settle for anything less than your righteous divine theory. No one here will convince you otherwise because you childish write anything off as simply the cause of feelings, and this irrationality, and thus irrelevent.

    I wasn't here to convince you of anything, and I made my arguement and now I am tired of said arguing. It sucks to argue without being heard at all. I might as well talk to a brick wall, or a recorder re-writing everything it's already said.

    It's no fun to just pick and choose your battles. It's a childish way of thinking, and a selfish way of arguing. So I'm kindly bowing out.

  3. #83
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    It's his attempt at saying because not everyone is an intellectual, and because not everyone simply thinks with no feelings attached, they are unfit and unqualified to make the hard decisions of life like whether we should think of babies as property or not.
    Oh, I know exactly what he's trying to do. It's the same old Seawolf game. I'm just playing along.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  4. #84
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    DCT does collapse into moral nihilism. I actually wrote a paper on that during my senior year.

    Man is a being with the capacity and need to understand. The knowledge of God is the highest good for man, and the knowledge of God is through dominion; i.e., man comes to know God through understanding the nature of creation and working to develop the potential excellence within the creation. Therefore, we don't kill infants because that harms the infant; it keeps the infant from realizing its potential, and thus the glory the life of the infant would have otherwise revealed is kept unrealized, and we are deprived of knowledge of God that life would have revealed.
    The argument with respect to knowledge of God is not relevant as it merely symbolizes what man could achieve with regard to his potential. Your argument could be made without an appeal to divinity.

    Law is to regulate currently existing entities and not those that may exist in the future. Therefore we cannot take this in consideration.
    "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. #85
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    Does BW actually believe this stuff?
    It doesn't matter. It's just sad either way.

  6. #86
    E. N.. T... :P RiderOnTheStorm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/so
    Posts
    791

    Default

    BlueWing. Let's just agree to disagree. Everyone has the right to their opinion. Unfortunately this is yours. Good day.
    You can't always do it right, you can always do what's left.

    Thoughts rearrange. Familiar now strange. All my skin is drifting on the wind.~

  7. #87
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SillyGoose View Post
    How are you to know that the infant that is okay to be thrown away wouldn't be the one to cure cancer in 20 years?
    I just have to say, regardless of my opinion of euthanasia and abortion, I think it best to avoid making spurious arguments of the "what if?" variety.

    The problem? The same basis could be used to say, "Well, what if you don't have sex with your partner tonight? The baby you might have conceived could have done something remarkable! How can you not have sex?" (and, of course, remember that the same baby could have grown up to be Jeffrey Dahmer).

    Besides, of course, it signifies the value of the child not as an inherent quality but merely as a measure of its usefulness to society. THat's probably the opposite of the argument you'd like to make here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Enyo View Post
    Until it can survive on its own outside the womb, it's in mom as a parasite.
    Um, no.

    The fetus actually is comprised of half of the material from its mother, spawning from a biological process that is part and parcel to her own body. It's not an outside organism using her body, it actually begins as part of her body operating according to healthy biology.

    The only problem might be, at times, if the mom conceived from an act of sex she did not desire nor wanted to take responsibility for.

    I think modern society has to get over this idea that we are totally in control of our bodies and we only get pregnant if we want to. We're not, even if we can control pregnancy a great deal. We're still biologically animals and subject to the process of nature, so all that has to be taken into account when we choose our behavior.

    Quote Originally Posted by SillyGoose View Post
    Because it's talking about killing babies!!!! It's just a gut reaction to a yucky subject.
    Pretty much.

    I'm a parent. I have known my kids from the moment of their birth. Yes, I feel repulsion at the idea. A lot of repulsion, actually. I'm squishing it down right now.

    But I still think it can be discussed from a rational angle, to see if there is any delineations that can be drawn. And no, the OP wasn't really discussing "relationships" or "right/wrong" from someone's moral pov, it was describing utility and trying to determine if there was any point at which a developing human being passes from "not self" to "self."

    Maybe the topic is too repulsive to be approached from BW's angle here.

    And I suspect that this is just a social experiment of BlueWings to further advance his theory of crazy NF's and their crazy feelings that shouldn't have any place in society.
    Or it might not be about you at all.

    In any case, if you believe he is doing this, should you play along? Or is it inevitable because he's violating your values?

    This is such an odd weird meta-thread. I'm learning more from watching people's responses than from the actual content of the responses themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    My xxxJness has drawn too quick a conclusion and bitten me in the ass, I do believe.
    It's okay. We all have a few bite marks on our ass, it's part of being alive. (And tasting good.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Didums View Post
    What really is the difference between an embryo/fetus compared to a baby that has been birthed? The baby is outside of the mother, woopty-doo. It is still equally dependent the mother, its brain is barely developed and its skull will have to harden with time, it cannot consciously control its movement, it has no discernable thought other than primal insticts (food, poop) and its attempts to express these needs can barely be distinguished from one another, it has no traits to distinguish it as an individual other than genetic phenotype and will continue being a bland organism until personality starts developing in toddlerhood.
    Yeah. Especially nowadays, when babies that have only gestated for 5-6 months can actually survived being born (even if they might suffer health problems, perhaps for the rest of their lives, from the premature birth).

    In some ways, "birth" is a logically arbitrary measure of personhood. But it sure is an intuitive one, isn't it? "Common sense" says as soon as that baby is outside the mom, it looks like a separate tangible entity and we respond to it as such = hence, they are now a person.

    But again, that's not a logical thing, it's common sense and partly emotional.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #88
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    The argument with respect to knowledge of God is not relevant as it merely symbolizes what man could achieve with regard to his potential. Your argument could be made without an appeal to divinity.

    Law is to regulate currently existing entities and not those that may exist in the future. Therefore we cannot take this in consideration.
    The existence of divinity is important because that is what prescribes as normative the development of all things so that they realize their full potential.

    You needn't take my argument into consideration, (you already think the premises are false), I was just informing you of the position because it's superior to DCT, and it provides the rational for not killing infants provided one believes in God.

  9. #89
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    It's kind of wasteful to just kill them. Maybe we could use them for medical research that would improve the lot of the entire species. Society benefits and parents make a buck or two. What's not to like?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Hahaha. Would you decide for everyone when it's best to take a piss?

    What if, under your scenario, I killed your child. Would that be legal? Or are there only specific entities that are allowed to 'dispense' of these sub-humans?
    You have no right to damage my child just like you have no right to damage my automobile.

    Quote Originally Posted by Usehername View Post
    For my edification:

    Does BW actually believe this stuff? Or does he simply take comfort in completely setting aside any feelings he has to make every single decision? Or is his level of what's "not cool" to talk about as theory just far, far less of an issue than it is for the standard person?

    Like, what would happen if BW had progeny that he held in his hands that was all cuddly and stuff with his eyes and nose but was not yet two?

    BW?
    Yes he does.

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    You know. You refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that the laws are there to protect those incapable of thinking for themselves yet. I've stated that twice with no response, not to mention several other points I've made.

    You want to convince the world that you are so right. Yet, even if anyone acknowledges your points as being right in this sense or that, you refuse to settle for anything less than your righteous divine theory. No one here will convince you otherwise because you childish write anything off as simply the cause of feelings, and this irrationality, and thus irrelevent.

    I wasn't here to convince you of anything, and I made my arguement and now I am tired of said arguing. It sucks to argue without being heard at all. I might as well talk to a brick wall, or a recorder re-writing everything it's already said.

    It's no fun to just pick and choose your battles. It's a childish way of thinking, and a selfish way of arguing. So I'm kindly bowing out.
    It isnt a matter of Feel!!
    "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/

  10. #90
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I think it best to avoid making spurious arguments of the "what if?" variety.
    "What if?" questions are the INTPs forte. Though the kind of question you ask can indeed demonstrate your character to your audience, as has been illustrated.

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