Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)
-   -   The Wow I Can't Believe That News Story Thread (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/30710-wow-i-cant-believe-news-story-thread.html)

Lucem Ferre 11-04-2019 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 2087778)
I'm just sayin everyone else got a childhood man

Our fetish with childhood is kind of weird. I get that it's huge in impacting your life as an adult put pretending a happy childhood isn't as important as a happy adulthood is bizarre. It's such a small piece of our lives. For a lot of us it might even be the worst part of our lives.

So sticking that in my face is meaningless to me.

Chula Vista 11-04-2019 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre (Post 2087780)
pretending a happy childhood isn't as important as a happy adulthood is bizarre

Who did that?

Lucem Ferre 11-04-2019 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor (Post 2087786)
it's not that, it's just mathematically if you got an 80 year old and a 30 year old, all health being equal I'd say the 80 year old already got 50 extra and so it's only fair

There's variables in everything. How ever you have no clue of the ages of any of the 100.

Or if the kid will even make it to adulthood even if you save him.

Psy-Fi 11-05-2019 06:11 AM


jwb 11-05-2019 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre (Post 2087775)
No, because you're assuming that he'll always be suffering. You're likely preventing any chance of him to feel something that isn't suffering. It's also a very very lazy way to end his suffering.

so your objection is that I can't accurately predict the suffering that will be caused/prevented

I would argue that is also true of most of the thought experiments meant to argue in favor of utilitarianism.

E.G. your example of killing one child to save 100 people. That 1 person you kill might end up doing more to alleviate suffering than the other 100 combined. Or they might be a monster. Or somewhere in between. There is no way of knowing.

Let's say for the sake of argument (since all of this is already based on unrealistic hypothetical situations) that you somehow know for a fact that if you kill him you will alleviate more suffering than you cause. Is it still wrong?

OccultHawk 11-05-2019 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psy-Fi (Post 2087799)

Was there even a train to wreck?

Lucem Ferre 11-05-2019 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwb (Post 2087800)
so your objection is that I can't accurately predict the suffering that will be caused/prevented

I would argue that is also true of most of the thought experiments meant to argue in favor of utilitarianism.

How is that an argument? That's something I was saying in the other experiments.

Quote:

E.G. your example of killing one child to save 100 people. That 1 person you kill might end up doing more to alleviate suffering than the other 100 combined. Or they might be a monster. Or somewhere in between. There is no way of knowing.
I acknowledged the differing variables already.

Quote:

Let's say for the sake of argument (since all of this is already based on unrealistic hypothetical situations) that you somehow know for a fact that if you kill him you will alleviate more suffering than you cause. Is it still wrong?
I'm going to assume that you're talking about the homeless person.

If the homeless person didn't want to die then it's going to be immoral. It's not your choice to make and thinking you have that authority is immoral. If the homeless person wants to endure their suffering let them. If the homeless person wants to end it I assume they have all the ability to do that them self.

Lucem Ferre 11-05-2019 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psy-Fi (Post 2087799)

At least it's something much more interesting than the redundant arguments of free will or defeatism vs optimism where nobody respects that not everything is a dichotomy.

Frownland 11-05-2019 07:39 AM

Nah this is definitely as redundant and pointless as those discussions.

Chula Vista 11-05-2019 07:40 AM

Is there some sort of end point, or does the philosophical circle jerk just keep going and going?

In plain and simple terms, what are each of your main points?

20 words MAX.
GO!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:19 PM.


© 2003-2025 Advameg, Inc.