Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The Philosophy Of Infanticide
Collapse
X
-
-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
-
Originally posted by seer View PostTass, we are speaking of the definition of personhood here, and I said nothing about God's law, only that using personhood as a criterion is useless. Human life begins at conception and that is the rational, consistent and scientific standard we should use.Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostWhat are "universal ethical principles" and how do they evolve?
The theist will see the "universal" ethical principles as those grounded in the principles established by their god, and the atheist will see "universal" ethical principles as those commonly held by most people, groups, cultures, and nations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostTass, we are speaking of the definition of personhood here, and I said nothing about God's law, only that using personhood as a criterion is useless. Human life begins at conception and that is the rational, consistent and scientific standard we should use.
Originally posted by Jedidiah View PostExactly. The concept of personhood has absolutely no role in science, since personhood has no scientific basis. As I have said before, and received gibberish response, the only role I can see for the concept of personhood is to find ways to place some people outside so their individual rights can be disregarded.
It is a legal concept.Last edited by Tassman; 06-06-2018, 08:51 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by element771 View PostA newborn infant cannot survive independent of someone taking care of it. What is the difference?
Also, what if the technology becomes available? Would you then change your position?
That is only dependent on current technology. That is what the fundamental problem with your criteria.
So I could kill a brain dead man and that would be ok because he is not "viable"?The body of the fetus is not the same as the body of the mother.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostOh really! So what were you implying with: "you have no objective way to show that your definition is the correct definition". We do in fact have an obvious criterion, namely that the rights of 'personhood' come into effect when the fetus could survive outside the womb, i.e. when it is viable. this is the most common criterion used in drafting laws regulating abortion.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostLawrence Kolberg proposed six stages of moral development, beginning with "avoiding punishment" (the most juvenile or undeveloped level) and continuing to "universal ethical principles" (the most mature level) such as those embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. .
The theist will see the "universal" ethical principles as those grounded in the principles established by their god, and the atheist will see "universal" ethical principles as those commonly held by most people, groups, cultures, and nations.-The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.
Sir James Jeans
-This most beautiful system (The Universe) could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.
Sir Isaac Newton
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThe burning of witches was done with good reason, it was believed at the time, just as was Moses' genocide, slavery and rape of the Midianites. But the universal ethical principles, that are commonly held by most people, groups, cultures, have evolved since then and are best embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Just like it was moral for Hitler to gas Jews because that society believed it was moral.
If morals are just a group consensus by various societies, then there are no "universal ethical principals"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostJudging by what the UK just did recently to two babies, Charlie Gard and Alfie Evans, they not only support infanticide, but practice it.
Starlight must be proud.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Quantum Weirdness View PostOk. And why ought I follow them?
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostYes, but as we have seen that definition of personhood is arbitrary and that it has no more basis than the definition of the authors in the OP.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostNo more arbitrary than the various interpretations of scripture. At least it has the benefit of being based upon a measurable event, namely the development of a functioning brain and the consequent viability of the fetus.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostNo more arbitrary than the various interpretations of scripture. At least it has the benefit of being based upon a measurable event, namely the development of a functioning brain and the consequent viability of the fetus.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo I guess you are not a person then.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostSo why use this arbitrary definition of personhood in the first place? Why not use the scientific, undeniable, point when human life begins - conception?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
173 responses
635 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
Yesterday, 07:30 AM
|
Comment