Yup. The reality of the universe is really bleak for these people, so they have to keep throwing out mental barriers and logical blocks to maintain their comfortable reality. The idea that the universe isn't ruled by a comfy grandpa-figure, that there isn't some form of penultimate moral guideline, and that there isn't a life after death, is just something they can't accept as being real, like someone who tells another person that their parent is dying. It's just massive denial, that's constantly being fed by zealotry and blind faith. It's sort of sad this sort of attitude is the majority position of our species.
Couldn't of said it better myself. Their fear is so deeply ingrained that they must lash at whatever threatens it, and close down their mind to any opposition. They have to laugh it off, sneer at it, and through as much contrived nonsense at it as possible until it goes away.
I hope they realize that isn't going to hold up forever.
Ill mention it to him, but considering he hasnt posted in awhile(how longs it been since hes posted anyways? Lots of crap happening the past few days on my end so I lose track of things easily), well see if we get the chance to move it over to morality.
Indeed. I have yet to pm you about this, since im currently a little busy, but Ill see If I get the chance to drop a pm at a later point today.
And as for jdavidc, I THOUGHT he was a damn good arguer and at finding sources, however after a bit of digging I noticed that his more lengthy replies either came from wikipedia (about the roe vs wade issue) or from that white paper of his, which Im still a bit skeptical about since it looks like it has a pro life agenda anyways. He....doesnt really know how to argue the points in his own words it seems >_>.
And uh...huh. Looks like the abortion debate thread is gone. I recently refreshed the page and it gave me a message "no thread specified exists". The thread was jdavidc's thread if i recall, correct?
Like I said Id call them opinions rather than truths, but I guess that an opinion in and of itself. As for suicide, the way i see it suicide is a very, very mentally crippling idea. How exactly I know this....well discuss at a later point through pm. Id rather the public not see this >_>.
Mmm, yes, at first I was having trouble with his arguments, but then I realized that the only arguments he had a good case against were the ones where I made bad logic anyways. The other cases where from me shitting to many bricks at the sheer length that I was momentarily blinded from seeing them. Took me a couple of days, but lets see what his next move is.
True, but couldnt you argue that the people trying to stop some one from commiting suicide are also selfish? It seems like the way you go about arguing it is that the person who is stopped from commiting suicide is stopped because he/she is essentially a "reservoir of happiness". In other words they are selfishly forced to stay alive to be a means of happiness for the people that know him/her. I think it just misses the original purpose of the sanctification of life, where as it should have been about life being awesome, it turns into game of politics where people argue who deserves more happiness/end of pain than another.
And good to see you're rational about self sacrifice in relation to a child. At least theres that.
Oh, I see. I wouldnt call those truths "truths", instead id call them opinions, unless im missing something here?
Ensoulment eh? I wouldnt be surprised. He seems pretty damn dedicated to making sure he has the last word(or in this case reply). And do please take a wack at it, Im afraid hes going into territory that Im not informed enough upon to argue with him on equal ground >_>
Naw, its all good man, I have jdavidc in the abortion debate to keep my company for the time being >_>. While his logic has its flaws, he knows how to argue in a way that it either isnt apparent or hard to understand, making it difficult to really debunk any of his ideas. I like a challenge though, since I now know how to respond to some brand new arguments.
"I believe the value it has, is the value the individual gives it"
There would be a bit of an inconsistency in terms of suicide, assuming you're against it, how ever it seems like you arent, going by the rest of your reply.
Im wondering how ever if your post was in any way a direct reply to one of my statements? Im a little confused as to the context of your reply.
Yeah, I can understand if any one was annoyed that the topic of their thread ended up being de-railed. Ive learned it first hand from 4chan.
And yes, pro lifers tend to be very, very hard headed. I sometimes want to reach my arms though the monitor and wring their necks out like a wet rag.
Though I generally side with abortion until the moment the child is born(though if the mother was planning to get an abortion anyways it makes me wonder why she would go through so many months of suffering in the first place), I can agree with the idea of a fetus gaining person hood at sentience, though to my knowledge that threshold hasnt been discovered yet. When it is, I'll rethink my philosophy if necessary.
And thanks, every day is a good day to be a philosopher I suppose. And one last thing, verifiable evidence was consistently ignored? As in relation to abiogenesis? Mind clarifying?
Sarcasm doesnt translate well over the internet Im afraid.
As for the emergence of life, I tend to side with the idea of abiogenesis, but of course I'm not sure where it lies on the continuum of hypothesis to fact. Seems like the most reasonable argument for the time being, until something more verifiable comes along.