261–270 of 527 posts
A good test. The guy is older and wanted to remain alive, despite the wishes of his family. And pigs are so close to humans anyway -- which is why I have the theory of why humans love bacon so much. Best wishes to Mr. Bennett, and hope that whatever happens, it will be a good leap for humanity.
Human Bacon, the final frontier. How long until you can buy Beyond Human burgers?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the Zeitgeist of the social networks is "destroy the sinner mercilessly and crush him into dust" plus "whoever does not take part in that crushing or even advocates for mercy is suspicious himself". And too many journalists are on their social network accounts every waking hour, so it seeps through. I suspect that quite a lot of people would support denial of medical care to sinners. For example, the sentiment…
What you see on social networks is a reflection of who you choose to follow and engage with. I use social networks to engage with people who actually make those decisions and they do not encourage any of that.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/04/twitt...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it makes sense to me. Your reading is a little bit uncharitable. Seems almost like you didn't make any effort to understand it, and just rather pretend that it's stupid...Sigh. But I suppose I could have helped you by saying the other part which I think about this: That's why the legal system is so important. We need a way to do these things, that's not about individuals getting revenge. So...you kill Alice, the…
I don't know if this will be helpful to you, but I'm throwing it out there. In a consequentialist, utilitarian moral system, revenge cannot be a moral good on its own. If a universe where one person gets hurt is worse than a universe where no one gets hurt, a world where two people get hurt must be worse still. So if you're utilitarian, you believe in justice as a means to prevent crime. Punishing people can act as a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why we’ll never have a rehabilitative justice system. We don’t deserve it. He was convicted in 1988 and sentenced to 10 years behind bars, probably served less so it’s likely that he’s been a free man for 25+ years. It’s been over 30 years since the incident. Give the man a break.
Some want vengeance in place of justice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is so simple and newspapers trying to make it into a matter for debate is actually compromising that. Even if one were to consider moral character when allocating organs in general: the researchers needed someone who was sick and likely to die, ineligible for human organ transplant (here, because of severity of condition), and not so sick that there was no chance of success or useful data. So, we're already pi…
Considering a person's criminal record is not the same as considering their moral character.
Although some might argue that there was a certain correlation between the two.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/anthony-stokes-tee...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not being able to use emperical evidence to prove a normative claim is a very common (albeit not universal) belief. Probably because nobody has really convincingly done so in thoussands of years. > To call an argument "valid" is to make a normative claim; it is to claim that a rational agent ought to accept it. Idk, it could just be a claim that the argument can be expressed in a logical system, combined with the nor…
The practical/empirical argument would essentially be to extrapolate out what the world will become like if we spread X or Y normative belief/practice. You can argue that one will lead to a preferable world than the other. Of course, we may have different preferences, so we may not agree even if we agree on that extrapolation. But often basic human preferences like not wanting to be the victim of unprovoked public vi…
Example of application: Consider "It is always immoral to have children". Obviously, if humanity universally obeyed that principle, human extinction would inevitably and quickly follow. Therefore, that principle is false. From which obviously follows: "It is moral to have children (at least sometimes)".
Now, I would propose we accept that meta-moral principle as an axiom. To me, and to many others, it seems self-evidently and intuitively true. Who seriously doubts or denies this axiom? Well, most of the people who doubt or deny it, do so not due to its specific content, but due to a philosophical objection to accepting any moral axioms at all. The number of people who are happy to accept moral axioms but would refuse to accept this particular one appears to be rather small. It seems as good a candidate to be an axiom as any other. So why not accept it as an axiom?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is an interesting comparison to other reasons why we kill animals, however, the point wasn’t a relative moral comparison to animal slaughter for food purposes but that it’s not zero cost morality wise to kill an animal in its prime.
It's not zero cost morality wise to kill anything at any point in their lifetime; from bacteria, to worms, to flies, to pigs each has its own weight on a person's conscience be it nil or hefty. I mean that. But a pig is not human so it's acceptable to me.
Your earlier comment mentioned morality without qualifiers; here you refer to your own morality; this seems more accurate. Note that there are people who refuse to eat or otherwise harm animals and they cite moral reasons too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read the article. Sadden he took such drastic actions & that it led to someone’s suffering for so many years until their eventual death, but he served his time in jail. Isn’t that how we repay criminal debts in society? Not a very good argument to deny anyone life saving care after they served their sentencing(or because for their past actions for that matter). If the family believed the sentencing wasn’t accurate th…
> If the family believed the sentencing wasn’t accurate that’s a different matter. It probably depends on what you mean by 'accurate'. They almost certainly do not believe this person has repayed a debt to the victim, the victim's family or society in general. Phrasing the issue as one of repaying a debt is problematical when it is beyond the means of the perpetrator to make amends. Note that this is not an argument…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
...and the next step would be "we're not going to treat you for Covid because you're not vaccinated".
This is not same. The non vaccinated are actively choosing to be a danger to people around them. It is like actively carrying concealed unlicensed gun which can silently and anynomously fire at people.
> The non vaccinated are actively choosing to be a danger to people around them.
> It is like actively carrying concealed unlicensed gun which can silently and anynomously fire at people.
What about giving a life extension to someone who stabs other people?
The recipient of the heart transplant, David Bennett, actively chose to be a danger to people around him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely not, that's not how it works. You won't be denied tramua treatment for a gunshot because your doc told you to stop playing with guns. You won't be refused heart medicine because you didn't stop eating bacon when your doctor told you to 5 years earlier. You won't be denied ER treatment because you were drunk when you crashed your car. There is no rule where we have to treat all patients equally (including m…
If a collapsed lung from a gunshot wound was contagious you sure would. If having your head split open in a DWI accident was contagious you would. Like 99% of the arguments against vaccination this isn't nearly as pithy as you think. After seeing what going through the initial wave of COVID in a medical provider in the ER did to my mother I could not care less about how many loopholes in efficacy people want to tout.…
To be clear my position is that you should treat everyone, fatties, smokers, antivax, whatever, merely because I don't know when I'm going to find myself in one of the "wrong" groups and I'd like to get treatment then, so I think they should get it too.