What's unwarranted about harm that results from following a "worthy goal"? I justify it by making the assumption that other humans are like me, are ca...
Ultimately in your recognition of yourself as a free subject in interaction with other subjects. I am not arguing against "thinking twice". I have nev...
It does. It cannot be both no person and a person at the same time. That's the principle of non-contradiction, the most basic principle of logic. Yes,...
Then it follows that necessarily there is also no person who could be harmed by being born. You're ignoring the context of my comment. As I said over ...
We'd need to know the reason why we're doing it thoug. For example, if we're creating some sort of slave caste, because we'd like others to serve us a...
Both these problems stem from looking at morality as a set of injunctions against specific outcomes, like a criminal law code listing a bunch of injur...
It won't hurt if you use enough bombs. And anyways, what is the very brief suffering of a few billion compared to the unfathomable suffering of billio...
The question is meaningless. Good question. Perhaps the obligation is also self-contradictory. But on the other hand we could say that the obligation ...
This implies that humans start as individuals and then "come together in groups". But that is not what historically happens. Humans always already sta...
They're not so much unimportant as they are nonexistent. Apart from that, you just apply whatever moral principles you would otherwise. If you think d...
"Cause" and "Effect" are not ontological categories. They don't describe any state of affairs. They're merely temporal categories to order events. Lik...
It is unless we're operating on a specific definition, in which case this should be set out in the beginning. Do you have anything specific you can po...
I think this is mostly down to interpretation. I mean if you don't care about whether rules like "you cannot kill people" can be derived from more bas...
I don't think this holds from either a logical or a historical perspective. While the term "individual" may not logically depend on a specific group, ...
I don't see how this is the case. Parents can also protect their children from objects. But this implies that the child that doesn't yet exist already...
I don't see how there could be a "violation" if there is nothing protected. I am asking to find out what your "default positions" are, because it seem...
It's not about getting consent from some individual after they have been born. That'd be ridiculous. The point is realizing that consent is based on r...
The question that needs answering first here is why consent is important. If it's because we care about some notion of "choosing your destiny", the co...
But if consent is something that matters, then the imposition is necessary, because its the conditio sine qua non for consent. If the core of morality...
Yes, precisely. That is the contradiction. So what is your answer? Because if this is so: Then how can you support denying people any decision whatsoe...
It seem to me one could imagine a society where one person makes the rules, but the rules aren't enforced. i.e. centralized power (as in A) but no coe...
But this really just sounds like the suffering isn't actually what matters. The argument really only refers to suffering as something that exists. But...
You can always set up categories that include all possible options. For example, using the classical meaning of republic - a system of government wher...
Not commenting on the historical accuracy of your system, but one thing that does seem possible is "rule by algorithm", where there isn't actually any...
So, can I impose things that aren't suffering on others? Also your request to "not compare E v N vs. E scenarios" just seems impossible. Since there i...
You don't usually apply your own judgement in place of others, no. But the reasons why matter. Note that we got here from this: via this: So is harm d...
That's simply not true. Most vaccines can potentially cause serious side effects, and you always gamble the long term benefits outweigh the short-term...
Aren't you directly contradicting your earlier example about vaccinating children here? And apart from that, how are you going to assess whether there...
Like which ones? So, to leave the boundaries of accustomed debate a bit: Why does it matter whether it's self-imposed? If it's about avoiding sufferin...
I wasn't aware we were traveling between worlds in a literal sense. See, here is the negative framing again. That the only reason anyone would accept ...
Without any qualification? If you're in an abusive relationship, surely you should cause heartbreak. It'd be just as easy to come up with situations w...
Instead of rehashing the same arguments made on this forum a dozen times before, I'd like to look more at the underpinnings of your view. Why is it a ...
I think it's interesting that an Anti-Natlist has a very strong individualist, classical-liberal bend. I wonder if you share it. After all, you do als...
No, but it's still weird to insist it cannot be an obligation even though you'd not expect anyone to object to doing it. But do you not also consider ...
How else could it be deduced, other than by asking, in some form, what rules we would want everyone to follow? What use would morality be if it didn't...
My goal was more to point out exactly the difference you set out here, which to me looks like a performative contradiction. You're presumably not "col...
As I have noted before, society can be conceptualised as a net of obligations to one another, from being obliged to protect the life of your children ...
That probably depends on what interpretation of quantum mechanics you ascribe to. The Copenhagen interpretation would, I think, lead to the conclusion...
"Positive" here is used in a similar vein as "positivism" or "to posit". It's a positive duty because it obliges you to act in a specific way. A negat...
Generally, this refers to a view of society that is comprised of individuals meeting each other on a level playing field with no previous obligations,...
The sense I get from this is that you somehow imagine the perfect life to be some form of solitary existence in a state of bliss, which I find kinda o...
The term "valid" usually refers to the structure of an argument. You're obviously not using it that way, the problem is I don't know what you mean by ...
This only makes sense if you presume there exists some divine logos which is the source of morality and also capable of recognising possible states of...
Good write-up. I would add that the core notion that any risk of suffering ought to be either mitigated or completely prevented is, on closer examinat...
I don't think the GOP has applied pressure on it's members to contest the election. Concerning the Justices, I don't think this is a matter of the GOP...
Comments