khaled

Why do you set it up so that your survival instincts are not part of “you”? Why do you consider it an external thing that is burdensome instead of par...

At what point can you be sure you got it right and are not just making a mistake?

Seems rather cynical to argue that that’s the only motivation behind not being dogmatic with your views.....

I don’t see how these two follow from your or bartricks’ arguments either could you explain? Being a master logician would mean that you can tell, giv...

Because they evolved to do so. I wouldn’t describe the best moments of my life as “bearable”. I’d give a bit more than that. Why do you do anything? E...

This seems like one of those questions like “Why is there something rather than nothing” or “Why does gravity exist” etc. A dead end with no answer. I...

I don’t think the emotional relationship is correlated with how correct or incorrect your position is. It seems to be its own variable. One that I hav...

Example?

I still don’t see what makes things like the law of non contradiction an imperative. You two seem to, if not agree, at least understand what that mean...

There are laws of reason. There is no such thing as imperatives of reason (unless by that you mean “imperatives to follow the laws of reason”). Becaus...

That's not what I think. What I think is that the laws of reason are not imperatives. They are not commands. In the same way that the law of gravity i...

False. You kept restating it. That's all you did. Here were your "arguments": On the other hand I've shown why they are not: Not right. You, personall...

You saying it doesn't make it so, but even assuming this: Anyone giving directives on how you should reason becomes omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibe...

It does matter. Because you need them to be directives for them to require a mind. They are not directives. Therefore they do not require a mind. In t...

You could. I assumed by the laws of reason you mean things like excluded middle, or non-contradiction. Those aren't directives. And couched ad-homs do...

You're not going to defend what you said?

It's neither, because it's not a directive. "You should follow the laws of reason" is prescriptive. "People follow the laws of reason" is descriptive ...

Why? Why must a law be housed in someone's mind somewhere? Did the law of gravity not exist before Newton discovered it? ?

Is the disagreement. The distinction between what “unless necessary” means for before and after birth is what I don’t get. We are doing both.

I don’t

but you cannot choose to remain conscious no matter how drunk you get. Which shows that they are interconnected. You also cannot choose to stop being ...

I think if you get the body exactly right you will inadvertently get consciousness. It’s not like consciousness is some magic sauce you add at the end...

The lifeguard did not have an interest to save the person in the water. But you didn’t care. It is true that the lifeguard had interests in general, b...

No. I don’t mean it literally. Me and shope understand each other. And I didn’t say anything about rights or dignity, those were introduced by him.

But you refuse to balance the harm done to the child vs the harm done to the people in the room. Why? Because the child isn’t born yet? I don’t see th...

Not the way I see it. You admitted that waking up the lifeguard is a violation of dignity right? Yet you are fine with doing so. You seem to be using ...

I would go as far as to say that if she is pro-choice, her not doing so is outright wrong. I don't mind it. If abortion is considered not harmful then...

But harming the people in the game for the sake of other people in the game is fine? Because I needed to keep reestablishing that you find it fine to ...

Who cares? There are people in the room. Similar to how you didn't care about violating the lifeguard's dignity because there is a person in the water...

Way I see it, there is only the first 3 groups. No one would ever identify as someone from group 4 or 5. Group 4 is group 2 that you don't agree with....

I don't think it should matter. Never have. I don't think that just because the child doesn't exist his suffering gets special value in the calculatio...

Yup. Sure. But the point is to not guess ridiculously. I can't justify killing someone because "maybe it's actually gonna be a good thing later". ANs ...

That is what I do when I consider the people in the room. This is the exact point I disagree with. Because it leads to things like: The lifeguard did ...

That's not the critique I'm talking about. I'm talking about the "Colosseum" argument. "How many spectators must there be in the Colosseum before thei...

But you would wake up the life guard. How come? This is a quantitative difference. You only make it qualitative in the one case by giving harm done to...

This is effectively special pleading though. Because in no other scenario is it possible for harm to be absolutely prevented. I don't understand why t...

That is not true. I am accounting for both, instances of harming people and instances of "reducing pleasure". Because the latter is a harm. Sorry if I...

Ok.

Well initially I wanted to point out this: But if you want to consider non human harm then yes any form of procreation will be unethical right off the...

Not sure I agree. Just more praised to do so at great cost to yourself. I am reluctant to say that self-sacrifice is a good thing in itself. There is ...

Yup. What would be grotesque is if I said "You must not reach out and help". But that is not the case. Because it's not clear to me other forms of it ...

How many bullies do you require before the pleasure they get from bullying someone trumps the suffering they inflict and therefore makes it ok? Or bet...

Why do you think it's implausible? Yes. But not procreating brings about arguably worse suffering (if you only look at human suffering). It depends on...

Yes because you could have chosen to take account of your own suffering and not done the heroic act, but you went above the call of duty and helped pe...

A killjoy is someone who decreases people's joys as you defined it. That clearly doesn't apply here. As there are no people. If you want to count not ...

We're not. I'm talking about joys and sufferings as considerations for doing things to other people, not for yourself. We make joy/suffering calculati...

I’m of the mind that we have no moral obligation to create pleasure. Period. Furthermore that we’re not even obligated to alleviate all suffering, onl...

Didn’t claim otherwise. Example?

Why would it not be right? We consume and kill our planet, and in the process are happy. What’s weird about that? Wreckless consumption is fun. Note t...

Because I find that we never use joys to trump considerations of suffering irl. And we never make duties out of providing pleasure but we make duties ...