Leontiskos

- Right, or simpler: for to claim that choice 87 was chosen "because the various pool balls slamming together in his brain," is to claim that there wa...

I think that, compared to the rest of the living sphere, there is a qualitative difference in human rationality and freedom, but that lower nature is ...

The argument holds that human life is evil (or bad) on account of suffering, and therefore we should not further human life by procreation. The propos...

No, this conclusion is based on the false dichotomy that if an event isn't deterministic then it must be random/spontaneous. That is the false dilemma...

Oh? That's quite a syllogism you're stitching together. If you clean it up I think you will find that you are still begging the question. If I say tha...

I agree. Good points. I think this is right if we look at the fourth formulation instead of the first. Okay, interesting. I think that's a plausible i...

I think that what is primarily at stake is a "theological" question, namely the question of whether life itself is good or bad, and therefore my respo...

Well, Hanover has already brought up the issue we are now discussing: Does Sapolski have anything to say to this issue? That seems mistaken to me, and...

That's fair. I concede your point. I was thinking more about Hobbes' social contract than Rosseau's. My mistake. With that said, I do think Kant in hi...

Well you are begging the question. You are saying, "The agent's act had to be caused by something else, either deterministic or random. It couldn't ha...

I think Benatar's argument avoids the question of whether life or existence is good. There persists the conflation between the ontological and the "mo...

Yes, quite right. I don't see it as rational to simply define agent causation out of existence. "Everything is either random or determined, therefore ...

Right, a la: --- Good thoughts. I agree with some angles and disagree with others, but I see no need to intervene. I think your post will help stimula...

But their duty as pilot allows them to stop flying the plane, even though they know that by doing so innocent people will die? :wink: Did I? Not that ...

Why not? Understanding Kant's Protestant fideism is very helpful in situating his thought, and this recognition is commonplace among many scholars. Th...

You in the sense that you affirmed <this claim>, and @"tim wood" in the sense that he is creating an artificially high burden of proof for the thesis ...

This is the sort of modern Enlightenment canard that now stands in disrepute, but you are of course welcome to continue holding it and/or arguing for ...

Does a pilot have a duty to fly his plane? Suppose you are driving your car. Four people appear on the road, two on each side. If you keep going in th...

Or else it's not as black and white as you purport. This should not be hard to see given that both options you give seem to me to be caricatures. Rega...

Another way to put the same sort of point is as follows. There is a relationship between claims about the forest and claims about the trees, and claim...

Well the pilot is flying the plane, but the person in the trolley problem is not driving the trolley. Therefore to "do nothing" would seem to be quite...

But does anything make sense under "deep analysis"? It seems to me that when any totalizing paradigm is pushed too far one falls into nonsense. So whe...

Taking a cue from , I would say that determinism means that, "all actions and events are necessary effects of impersonal causes," and fate means that,...

Okay thanks, I think I sort of see where you are coming from. It is something like the idea that Gerson fails to recognize Aristotle's naturalism inso...

Do you think this a sound argument?

I think there are two different conceptions of morality which are butting heads: one which is based on justice and individual rights, and another whic...

I think this is probably the one I was thinking of: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kuvshyo0knI, especially the section on Kant's background. So from ...

All philosophers are conditioned by factors they fail to recognize or admit, and these factors are identified by scholars.

So now that I look again he is appealing more to the Machiavellian-Hobbesian context than Rousseau in particular, but it is similar: The broad idea is...

The question is then whether these exceptions to (1) apply to the case of procreation. For example, we can cause suffering absent consent when punishm...

Okay. Sure. Okay, so maybe something like this? Do not cause suffering, absent consent Procreation causes suffering, and does not admit of consent The...

Sure, as I said in the same post:

The debates over double effect get pretty tricky. I touched on some of that in <this post> from another thread. Suppose a pilot runs out of fuel over ...

Then you're using it dishonestly or equivocally, for not only is that not what the word means, it is also not what the word means to your interlocutor...

I tend to disagree with fdrake. There are philosophers and there are philosophers. By "intellectually substantive partner" I suspect that Bob is think...

- The <paper> I cited earlier represents my position. I am actually going to move on from this thread. I think you will have a more fruitful conversat...

Looks like caricature to me.

It's the intellectual part of the trolley problem. Clearly not meant for this thread.

Peter Simpson makes this point almost exactly. --- - Excellent - I need to read more Maritain. I have been reading John Deely, a well-known semioticis...

You literally say it in this very post: - Why not? (enter the doctrine of double effect)

Then I would say you are misunderstanding the trolley problem. But the deeper problem is that you are unaccountably assuming that the trolley problem ...

I think it is "most definitely absurd" to justify killing innocents as a means to an end. Hitler was already brought up, and that's why we think Hitle...

Here is the original statement I disagreed with: Here is what Bob Ross said (and I agree): This is precisely the sort of answer that your construal ca...

Sure, and people get math problems wrong all the time, too. That doesn't mean anything with respect to the question at hand. Suppose you are on a math...

No, that's not what I am saying. Your premise is <Consent should precede birth>. Your conclusion follows, <Because consent does not precede birth, the...

Here is what you said: Here is how I characterized it:

I don't claim that the paper exactly parallels the trolley case, but later in the paper that portrayal is specifically disputed, so it does not depart...

Yes, part of the trolley problem requires us to determine the nature of such omissions. This is a different point, and it goes back to my claim that a...

An inversion is occurring where consent becomes more fundamental than life. A similar inversion occurs where the justification of society displaces Ra...

- The view your construal excludes is well-represented by Peter L. P. Simpson's, "Justice, Scheffler, and Cicero." The paper also constitutes a respon...