On legality of Infanticide

[Lateralus]

Most likely some jail time. Its highly valued property, much like a house, or a business. Much akin to the penalty you'd incur for the crime of arson.

Arson is a serious crime, not because of the property damage (which is usually covered by insurance, unless the arsonist is the beneficiary), but because of the potential loss of human life...what if someone is in the building? How much prison time would I get if I got into my car and smashed into yours right now? Probably none. I'd get a traffic ticket. My license might be suspended, but that's about it.

 

[Totenkindly]

"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.

I think I was saying that, in a logical argument, saying you shouldn't do anything on the off chance that perhaps something good might have happened (without having ANY evidence of what is most likely to happen!) is, well, not really that logical at all.

Hence = I shouldn't respond to your post because you just might get angry and somehow find out my personal information and come to my apartment and murder me in my sleep.

Or I could just as easily say that I should respond to your post because you might fall madly in love with me and bear me many wonderful gifts.

See? That sort of speculation just is so pointless.

 

[Jack Flak]

I think I was saying that, in a logical argument, saying you shouldn't do anything on the off chance that perhaps something good might have happened (without having ANY evidence of what is most likely to happen!) is, well, not really that logical at all.

Ah, I see. I call that overanalyzing, and it displeases me as well. In my view it's a waste of thought, because the time could better be spent contemplating something worthwhile.

 

[Lateralus]

Bluewing, are you cool with me getting a $50 fine for killing off your progeny? If this is the type of world you want, this is the type of situation you'll find yourself in.

 

[Totenkindly]

Ah, I see. I call that overanalyzing, and it displeases me as well. In my view it's a waste of thought, because the time could better be spent contemplating something worthwhile.

Yeah. I might also call it "wishful thinking" -- basically Ne gone wild, without any rational basis.

Bluewing, are you cool with me getting a $50 fine for killing off your progeny? If this is the type of world you want, this is the type of situation you'll find yourself in.

Only if the kid is over two, Lat -- otherwise, you'll go to jail, right where you belong.

 

[Lateralus]

Only if the kid is over two, Lat -- otherwise, you'll go to jail, right where you belong.

So I gotta wait until Bluewing's kids are two years old to take them out? I can live with that.

 

[Didums]

So I gotta wait until Bluewing's kids are two years old to take them out? I can live with that.

A normal child may be dispensed with until he has reached the age of 2

... (maybe you were joking and i didn't catch it, w/e)

 

[Lateralus]

...

Oh, that's what I thought, but Jennifer corrected me and she's usually right on those sorts of details, so I just assumed I was mistaken.

I'll take out Bluewing's kids in the hospital nursery.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

So I gotta wait until Bluewing's kids are two years old to take them out? I can live with that.

Kill under 2, you get a fine and some jail time. Kill over 2, its murder.

 

[Jack Flak]

Kill under 2, you get a fine and some jail time. Kill over 2, its murder.

Those aren't mutually exclusive, and that's how things are now anyway.

"WE'RE ALL FINE HERE. HOW ARE YOU?

Boring conversation anyway."

 

[Lateralus]

Kill under 2, you get a fine and some jail time. Kill over 2, its murder.

Remember my first post, about your judgment being arbitrary? I think I've demonstrated my point pretty well.

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Remember my first post, about your judgment being arbitrary? I think I've demonstrated my point pretty well.

You're missing the point. The penalty for damage of property concerning infants is akin to the penalty for damage of houses and businesses. The punishment may be nearly as severe as for murder, but the grounds for the punishment are slightly different.

I dont know what the penalty for arson is right now, though I'd pit it up at 10 years at this point. Killing an infant of somebody else should receive a similar penalty.

The difference between 2 and under 2 is that under 2 isnt a human, and 2 and over is.

 

[GZA]

I too think that is a weak argument. Your definition of human and animal are all very strange. Humans are animals, and killing animals is itself illigal, depending on the animal and everything.

How do you define psychological sense of self? Why is psychological sense of self required to be human? Humans are in fact biological animals, and what you seem to refer to as psychological sense of self (still not totally sure what that means in this sense) is not apparent in all animals anyway, including some that you may not be allowed to kill.

Babies have no trouble expressing their humanity. They eat, sleep, and shit just like everyone else, and just like every other animal.

 

[Lateralus]

The difference between 2 and under 2 is that under 2 isnt a human, and 2 and over is.

Yeah, like I said...arbitrary.

The Broncos/Chargers finish was a lot more exciting than this thread. Good luck with your plan, Bluewing.

 

[colmena]

Essentially the purpose of morality is to make our lives better, what conduces to human happiness is morally sound, what does not, is morally unsound.

The death of ones child is conducive to human unhappiness.

I suspect you don't have the foundation of 'logic' to realise that.

This will be the case until/if the majority reaches your intellectual ideal. This is an irrational discussion because presently your (I assume) universal/majority intellectual ideal is unattainable.

Presently, I would think 99% of people would not dispose of their birthed child whether it were the 'logical' decision or not.

This doesn't mean I don't enjoy irrational discussion, though.

 

[Didums]

Yeah, like I said...arbitrary.

Thank you for pointing out the nature of a theoretical discussion, arbitrary values are assigned to get discussion going, what is wrong with that?

 

[Lateralus]

Thank you for pointing out the nature of a theoretical discussion, arbitrary values are assigned to get discussion going, what is wrong with that?

How about reading the thread before you comment.

 

[Didums]

How about reading the thread before you comment.

Comments like that are worthless, well, most of the comments in this thread have been worthless, so it should be expected. Btw, you hurt my feelings

 

[Jack Flak]

EVEN JUST THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD IS SO ROFL ABSURD I CAN'T TAKE IT ANY MORE LOL. SPARE ME

 

[SolitaryWalker]

Yeah, like I said...arbitrary.

The Broncos/Chargers finish was a lot more exciting than this thread. Good luck with your plan, Bluewing.

I don't see the arbitrariness.