|
 mantis
 
Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 5,235
Loc: Bunker Alpha, GMC 
|
 Re: She is officialy pregant!  [Re: Silversoul]
#3824106 - 02/23/05 07:17 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Paradigm said:
I'll take a quick break from playing devil's advocate and clarify my own views on abortion: from the utilitarian perspective, a living thing is taken into ethical consideration not by its humanity, but by its capacity to feel pain, and although I do not consider myself a utilitarian, I think this is one factor to consider. One can reasonably judge something's capacity to feel pain by the presence of the nervous system. So once a fetus develops a nervous system, killing it will cause it pain. However, since I eat meat, I do not consider the capacity to feel pain to be the only consideration in such decisions. The fetus's pain may be measured against other considerations such as the life of the mother, birth defects which may make life unbearable, or possibly even the overpopulation problem(in which case it would be immoral to have children at all). I would say that during the 49 days prior to the development of consciousness, abortion is more or less acceptable. After that, it's iffy, and would depend on a number of other factors.
The reason I have been arguing against abortion in this thread is simply because of all the illogical arguments being put forth by the pro-choice people. If it were a bunch of pro-lifers making illogical arguments, I would refute those as well.
Did someone jam a Philosophical Logic stick up your ass? 
--------------------
|
 Todcasil
rogue DMT elf
Registered: 08/08/99
Posts: 16,381
Loc: Crawling on the floor...
Last seen: 9 years, 7 months
|
 Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: mantis]
#3824117 - 02/23/05 07:19 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
philo - phalus... very similar eh?
--------------------
Men look at themselves and they see flawed humans, we look at women and we see perfect
GODDESSES
Women look at themselves and they seem utterly human, when looking at men they see proud
GODS.
~Casil 
|
tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 4 years, 2 days
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Silversoul]
#3824121 - 02/23/05 07:20 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
OK lets do this. Lets let me have one more response, below, then you can respond, then we can make a poll in S & P directing people here asking who seems to have a better grasp of formal logic.
First, the Simon Rosenthal (Weisenberg???) center famously refuses to allow its scholars to address holocaust deniers. This is the organization I meant, and my rational is the same it gives. That there are renegade holocaust scholars who do debate deniers is interesting but irrelevant.
"I've taken 3 college-level philosophy classes, and I can say with certainty that you are full of shit, and have shown no understanding of how logic works."
Uh, I have a degree in philosophy and have TA'd for logic classes several times. I know a lot about how logic works.
If you knew how logic worked, you wouldn't say: "Last time I checked, humans and goats could not reproduce together. Therefore your argument is flawed." Your definition has nothing to do with reproduction. Your definition would need to mention it in order for my argument to be flawed. Your definition was "They define human life as anything which has human DNA and the potential to grow." Formalized, X is a person means by definition, X has human DNA and X has the potential to grow. I proposed X = a goat that you just cummed in. This goat has human DNA, has the potential to grow, and is not a person. This means your definition is bad. What you mean to say (and doing philosophy is really about refining ideas in this sort of way) is something like X is a person means by definition X's essential DNA is human and X has the potential to grow. But definitions like this are bad, our parts (legs, say) have both the potential to grow and essentially have human DNA, and our parts fail to be people. There are lots of books on human personhood about this sort of thing. I really doubt if mainstream pro-lifers even begin to grasp what happens in these debates.
"The pro-lifers have premises and conclusions, regardless of whether or not you choose to accept them."
Right, some of them do. But, things like "Be glad your parents weren't pro life" and "Fetuses have rights too" are talking points, not arguments. Further, even though some of their spokespersons have arguments, this does not mean that a random pro-lifer (or pro-choicer for that matter) could produce an argument to suppot their position.
"Logic has nothing to do with dismissing someone's arguments outright."
This is ridiculous. This is the entirety of logic. Logic looks at peoples arguments, and sees if they can be dismissed outright. If they can't, then the argument is valid and we look to see if the premises are true, and if they all are true, we are forced to accept the conclusion. When an argument is invalid, dismissing it outright is what logic instructs us to do. This is the only purpose of logic.
"If they make a claim and you disagree with it, show them why they're wrong."
I did. You were wrong in that case because you had a bad argument form, as exposed by the argument from analogy. You were so wrong, I didn't even need to address the content of your argument to show you were wrong. Look, its the same thing if someone says "If A, then B, and B, so A." You can show they are wrong no matter what A and B are. So, I can dismiss what you said outright, without considering the form.
"I don't get where you're getting this idea that it's a "marketing tool." Do you think pro-lifers do not genuinely believe the fetus has a right to life? Having gone to a Catholic school, I've known many pro-lifers, and as near as I can tell, they all genuinely believe this."
You have a supressed premise, namely that genuine beliefs are not advertisements. I would suggest that the purpose of advertising is to create genuine beliefs. Most people genuinely believe the next pepsi they drink or frito lay product they consume will bring them happiness. It's still a result of advertising.
"Not to mention that many of them are women, are very much in favor of women's rights, have no problem with gays, and enjoy sex as much as the next person."
Right, these people are victims of the right being allowed to frame the debate in terms of balancing the rights of a women against the right of a fetus.
But, I've done what I didn't want to do. Now people who have no training in critical thinking will read this and think there must be something to your side of it, because we are debating. But there isn't anythign to your side. Im not gonna respond to you anymore. This has quickly escalated into who's logical dick is bigger, and I'm done with it.
I'd be interested to hear what some women think about these issues, in particular about how the social pressure of the debate and public acceptence of the "A fetus is a person" or "balance the rights" sort of thing affects the decision to have an abortion, and a womans view of that choice.
--------------------
"I am eternally free"
|
mantis
Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 5,235
Loc: Bunker Alpha, GMC
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Todcasil]
#3824123 - 02/23/05 07:21 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Disturbingly similar! 
--------------------
|
mantis
Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 5,235
Loc: Bunker Alpha, GMC
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824131 - 02/23/05 07:23 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I stopped reading right here:
Quote:
I proposed X = a goat that you just cummed in
That's going in my signature!!! 
--------------------
|
Todcasil
rogue DMT elf
Registered: 08/08/99
Posts: 16,381
Loc: Crawling on the floor...
Last seen: 9 years, 7 months
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824150 - 02/23/05 07:28 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
cant we all just get along?
--------------------
Men look at themselves and they see flawed humans, we look at women and we see perfect
GODDESSES
Women look at themselves and they seem utterly human, when looking at men they see proud
GODS.
~Casil
|
MOTH
Wild Woman
Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 23,431
Loc: In the jungle
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Todcasil]
#3824162 - 02/23/05 07:30 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
|
tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 4 years, 2 days
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Todcasil]
#3824163 - 02/23/05 07:30 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
As long as no one thinks that dude is better at logic then me and threatens my psychological proxy for manhood...
--------------------
"I am eternally free"
|
looner2
ABBA fan
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 3,849
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: mantis]
#3824165 - 02/23/05 07:31 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Your definition was "They define human life as anything which has human DNA and the potential to grow." Formalized, X is a person means by definition, X has human DNA and X has the potential to grow. I proposed X = a goat that you just cummed in. This goat has human DNA, has the potential to grow, and is not a person. This means your definition is bad. What you mean to say (and doing philosophy is really about refining ideas in this sort of way) is something like X is a person means by definition X's essential DNA is human and X has the potential to grow. But definitions like this are bad, our parts (legs, say) have both the potential to grow and essentially have human DNA, and our parts fail to be people. There are lots of books on human personhood about this sort of thing. I really doubt if mainstream pro-lifers even begin to grasp what happens in these debates.
You should have took some biology courses in college. A human gamete does not fuse with a goat gamete. Therefore its not conception, and doesn't have the potential to grow.
--------------------
I am in love with Acidic_Sloth
|
mantis
Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 5,235
Loc: Bunker Alpha, GMC
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: looner2]
#3824173 - 02/23/05 07:32 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Leave me out of this pissing contest, you fascist wang-dang-doodle!
--------------------
|
tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 4 years, 2 days
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: looner2]
#3824202 - 02/23/05 07:39 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
His definition didn't mention fusion. X was the goat he cummed in, not the fusion of a goat gamete and a human gamete. The goat had the human DNA (it was in his ass), and had the potential to grow (completely unrelated to the DNA paradigm put in his ass) (ETA: And wasn't human). Thats all I needed to refute his definition.
There are other problems with the same definition. Consider a baby the instant before a sun supernove obliterates it. This baby is a human, but has no potential for growth (since in all futures available to it, it doesn't grow). By the definition, this baby wouldn't be a human on that definition, since it has no potential to grow, but it is a human, so the definition is wrong.
--------------------
"I am eternally free"
Edited by tomk (02/23/05 07:40 PM)
|
looner2
ABBA fan
Registered: 06/20/04
Posts: 3,849
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824204 - 02/23/05 07:40 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I am getting angry now. I hate when someone yields their fake verbel superiority over me when I know I could kill them with my bare hands.
--------------------
I am in love with Acidic_Sloth
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824205 - 02/23/05 07:41 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
First, the Simon Rosenthal (Weisenberg???) center famously refuses to allow its scholars to address holocaust deniers. This is the organization I meant, and my rational is the same it gives. That there are renegade holocaust scholars who do debate deniers is interesting but irrelevant.
I believe you mean the Simon Weisenthal center. I was not aware of this position of theirs, but it is a highly unscholarly position to take. You don't legitimize someone's argument by refusing to refute it. You refute it in order to delegitimize it.
"I've taken 3 college-level philosophy classes, and I can say with certainty that you are full of shit, and have shown no understanding of how logic works."
Uh, I have a degree in philosophy and have TA'd for logic classes several times. I know a lot about how logic works.
Remind me to slap your professor.
If you knew how logic worked, you wouldn't say: "Last time I checked, humans and goats could not reproduce together. Therefore your argument is flawed." Your definition has nothing to do with reproduction. Your definition would need to mention it in order for my argument to be flawed. Your definition was "They define human life as anything which has human DNA and the potential to grow." Formalized, X is a person means by definition, X has human DNA and X has the potential to grow. I proposed X = a goat that you just cummed in. This goat has human DNA, has the potential to grow, and is not a person.
How does it have the potential to grow? It is just human sperm lying around in a goat's uterus that will die without ever creating life. This is not growing.
What you mean to say (and doing philosophy is really about refining ideas in this sort of way) is something like X is a person means by definition X's essential DNA is human and X has the potential to grow. But definitions like this are bad, our parts (legs, say) have both the potential to grow and essentially have human DNA, and our parts fail to be people.
But they do not fail to be human life, and once they are severed from the body, they fail to grow new cells, and thus they die.
There are lots of books on human personhood about this sort of thing. I really doubt if mainstream pro-lifers even begin to grasp what happens in these debates.
This thread has shown that mainstream pro-choicers are not exactly privy to logic either.
"The pro-lifers have premises and conclusions, regardless of whether or not you choose to accept them."
Right, some of them do. But, things like "Be glad your parents weren't pro life" and "Fetuses have rights too" are talking points, not arguments.
So what? You don't think the pro-choice side is full of emotional appeals that have nothing to do with logic? Just look at all the people saying that I can't make these arguments because I don't know what it feels like to be pregnant. Where's the logic in that?
Further, even though some of their spokespersons have arguments, this does not mean that a random pro-lifer (or pro-choicer for that matter) could produce an argument to suppot their position.
Nor can you, apparently.
"Logic has nothing to do with dismissing someone's arguments outright."
This is ridiculous. This is the entirety of logic. Logic looks at peoples arguments, and sees if they can be dismissed outright. If they can't, then the argument is valid and we look to see if the premises are true, and if they all are true, we are forced to accept the conclusion. When an argument is invalid, dismissing it outright is what logic instructs us to do. This is the only purpose of logic.
When logic dismisses an argument, it does so on the basis of having committed a logical fallacy(such as your numerous ad hominems). The minimum requirement of logic when dismissing an argument would be to point out what fallacy has been committed. What college did you get your degree from, again?
"If they make a claim and you disagree with it, show them why they're wrong."
I did. You were wrong in that case because you had a bad argument form, as exposed by the argument from analogy.
As I have shown, it was your argument that was flawed.
"I don't get where you're getting this idea that it's a "marketing tool." Do you think pro-lifers do not genuinely believe the fetus has a right to life? Having gone to a Catholic school, I've known many pro-lifers, and as near as I can tell, they all genuinely believe this."
You have a supressed premise, namely that genuine beliefs are not advertisements. I would suggest that the purpose of advertising is to create genuine beliefs. Most people genuinely believe the next pepsi they drink or frito lay product they consume will bring them happiness. It's still a result of advertising, this point is off topic.
Then the same can be true of your own beliefs, and you are in no position to make that accusation against those who disagree with you.
"Not to mention that many of them are women, are very much in favor of women's rights, have no problem with gays, and enjoy sex as much as the next person."
Right, these people are victims of the right being allowed to frame the debate in terms of balancing the rights of a women against the right of a fetus.
Oh, for fuck's sake! Either put up or shut up. Explain why fetuses have no rights.
But, I've done what I didn't want to do. Now people who have no training in critical thinking will read this and think there must be something to your side of it, because we are debating.
I give up. You are so sickeningly blind to logic it makes me want to vomit.
--------------------
Edited by Paradigm (02/23/05 07:49 PM)
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824212 - 02/23/05 07:42 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
tomk said:
As long as no one thinks that dude is better at logic then me and threatens my psychological proxy for manhood...
You suck at logic, and fail life. kthxbye.
--------------------
|
tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 4 years, 2 days
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: looner2]
#3824215 - 02/23/05 07:43 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
right but thats what logic is and I have to defend myself from attacks on my use of it. If I was just in conversation with you, I wouldn't be dancing the tedious logic dance, but this guy started it by saying I wasn't logical and then I had to go into logic nerd mode. I am a pretty good logic nerd.
--------------------
"I am eternally free"
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: tomk]
#3824221 - 02/23/05 07:44 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
A "logic nerd" would not commit the numerous logical fallacies you've made throughout this thread.
--------------------
|
mantis
Registered: 01/26/03
Posts: 5,235
Loc: Bunker Alpha, GMC
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Silversoul]
#3824229 - 02/23/05 07:46 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Ad hominems spice up an argument w/ fallacious goodness!
"Liberals are making America weak by lowering morale" = BAD
"Liberals are making America weak by lowering morale and they're stupid faggots" = GOOD
--------------------
|
Silversoul
Rhizome
Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: mantis]
#3824234 - 02/23/05 07:47 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Hmmm...good point.
--------------------
|
tomk
King of OTD
Registered: 09/22/04
Posts: 1,559
Loc: PNW
Last seen: 4 years, 2 days
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Silversoul]
#3824261 - 02/23/05 07:53 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"A "logic nerd" would not commit the numerous logical fallacies you've made throughout this thread."
Grr...
I was not originally in "logic nerd" mode, I was in "try to provide comfort to women in a difficult situation" mode, generally, and, also "ranting drunk guy who hates right wing people" mode. Then I switched to logic mode. There are logical fallacies in Alice in Wonderland, the author is still really good at it. In fact, I would say even my use of techniques that are, strictly speaking, fallacies, only demonstrates my mastery of them. Logical Fallacy and Rhetorical device are much the same thing...
--------------------
"I am eternally free"
|
kaiowas
lest we baguette
Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,501
Loc: oz
|
Re: She is officialy pregant! [Re: Vulture]
#3824307 - 02/23/05 08:05 PM (19 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
you know vulture, I really have to commend you on your support for this person (regardless of what she did or didn't do). it doesn't appear that you hold any grudges and you're actually being considerate. you are thinking about her and not yourself...that ranks really high in my book bro.  
as far as abortion goes, how could anyone possibly say one way is "more wrong" than the other. we all have our views, every situation is different, so how can we say "one way is better than the other"
--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck 
Bulk Cannabis Seeds 
North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder 
Red Vein Kratom 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 all )
Shill
Deadkndys420
13.step
MagicalMystery
DeadPhan
TheCheat
FreeLaws1_6