'Mortal as I am, I know that I am born for a day. But when I follow at my pleasure the serried multitude of the stars in their circular course, my feet no longer touch the earth.'
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Abortion

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Abortion   Wed May 17, 2017 11:38 pm

I can construct a rational argument against abortion without needing religion.

1- Establish a logical set of "human beings" (homo sapiens). The set of "human beings" includes all members of the species "homo sapiens", as defined genetically.

2- Establish a logical subset of this set, of "developing human beings (homo sapiens)". The subset of "developing human beings" includes all members of the species "homo sapiens" as defined genetically, that are in some stage of the process of developing or gestating toward full autonomy. This can include either embryos, fetuses, or even infants. It may also be said to include people in a coma who need to wake and go through tremendous rehab and learning again how to do things like speaking or eating.


Now, we logically grant recognition of rights to things in the primary set (1) above. Of course it is quite possible for something in that set (i.e. a person) to forfeit some or maybe even all of their rights, such as if they commit certain crimes.

Not all rights apply to all people at all times. So we add a third premise:

3- Rights are applicable to things in set (1) or (2) [or any other subset of 1 or 2 that we might wish to establish] based on whether or not that right specifically can reasonably be said to apply to that thing individually.


So for example, we do not accord a fetus the right to freedom of speech, even though this is a rational human right that all things in set (1) are entitled to, assuming they have not forfeited that right and assuming that the right in question is reasonably applicable to that thing; in the case of a fetus, since it cannot talk and does not know language, the right to freedom of speech obviously does not apply to it. This also goes for very young infants.

Now, I need to establish the rationale of the second premise. This premise of the subset to (1) is a reverse engineering of the following argument: That it is impossible to establish or define a point at which a developing embryo or fetus becomes a human being. There is no point from conception to birth that can be logically and in non-contradictory manner demonstrated to be the precise moment at which this gestating thing suddenly becomes human. Because of this utter lack of any absolute dividing line, we must push the logical recognition of the categorical entity as far back as possible in order to avoid committing the error of failing to accord the thing membership in the category, precisely because we cannot logically and concretely establish the point at which entry into the category is granted.

Namely, because no one can coherently argue a precise moment somewhere between conception and birth that this developing/gestating thing becomes "human", we must recognize that no such line exists, and therefore we must add the category "developing/gestating human being" as a subset within the broader category "human being". There is no other non-contradictory resolution here than to include the developmental process within the overall category, since, again, there is no way to establish a dividing line between that developmental process and the catgegorical thing in question.


Now, it becomes clear that the right to not be harmed, or maybe just the right to life, should be granted to anything in category (1), and this now includes the subset (2) which is also within (1). We must also establish that "life" or "not being harmed" are reasonable rights to grand to the embryo/fetus, since of course certain rights do not apply to it (such as we saw above with the right to freedom of speech). So the question is: does an embryo or fetus have a reasonable capacity to possess a "right" to life and/or to not be harmed? Namely, is this embryo/fetus alive or capable of being harmed?

The answer is clearly yes. Since of course the embryo or fetus is indeed alive, and it cannot be argued that it is not alive, just as the cells or organs in your body are also alive, and as a consequence of that are capable of being harmed, just as an embryo or fetus can also be harmed. Therefore this right does reasonably apply to the embryo/fetus.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Wed May 17, 2017 11:38 pm

Next I will look at cases such as rape, incest, convenience, genetic defects, etc.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Thu May 18, 2017 3:40 am

Two problems with this argument:

--That people are not so easily universally defined as simply members of the same species, but our cultural, individual, biological etc. differences can be very profound. The attribution of value of rights to the category as universalized 'homo sapiens' species is perhaps an attempt at idealization, but also perhaps a noble such attempt. Nonetheless, this categorization cannot be the final say when it comes to determining species-status. It cannot only be that black and white, yes or no, but it is also this black and white, yes or no, too, just not only this. For example, self-valuing alone proves that we ascribe value with bias, and necessarily so, and therefore any universalized value-assertion per species categorization is going to leave some of that individualization out.

--Just because the argument states that abortion would be morally wrong, does not mean that we can say one should never get an abortion. Often the choices are between two wrongs, or between a wrong and a very intense motivation or desire/need, a prevailing context, and it comes down to a choice that a person must make... and then live with after making it.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1523
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Thu May 18, 2017 6:43 am

But that still does not give the government the right to play God with a woman's body.

The thing about abortion here in the USA is mostly regarding government funding of abortion.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Thu May 18, 2017 11:20 am

Sisyphus wrote:
But that still does not give the government the right to play God with a woman's body.

The thing about abortion here in the USA is mostly regarding government funding of abortion.

It's not about "a woman's body", that is just propaganda. It is about another living being that just happens to be in her body at the time.

A developing human being as either embryo or fetus is not in any way the same as the body of the woman in whom it is gestating.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1523
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Thu May 18, 2017 7:57 pm

Thrasymachus wrote:
Sisyphus wrote:
But that still does not give the government the right to play God with a woman's body.

The thing about abortion here in the USA is mostly regarding government funding of abortion.

It's not about "a woman's body", that is just propaganda. It is about another living being that just happens to be in her body at the time.

A developing human being as either embryo or fetus is not in any way the same as the body of the woman in whom it is gestating.

Just look at how people are treated by others around the world. There is no value in a human being. None.

How about practicing restraint and not having so many babies and take better care of the humans who are already alive?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Fri May 19, 2017 8:24 am

Sisyphus wrote:
Thrasymachus wrote:
Sisyphus wrote:
But that still does not give the government the right to play God with a woman's body.

The thing about abortion here in the USA is mostly regarding government funding of abortion.

It's not about "a woman's body", that is just propaganda. It is about another living being that just happens to be in her body at the time.

A developing human being as either embryo or fetus is not in any way the same as the body of the woman in whom it is gestating.

Just look at how people are treated by others around the world.  There is no value in a human being.  None.

Entirely false. People care about others, for others, treat others with respect and love, in addition to doing the opposite. You're only taking a very one sided view.

Quote :
How about practicing restraint and not having so many babies and take better care of the humans who are already alive?

How about having enough babies to meet the replacement rate of 2.1 without needing to import millions of people from outside of your own society and culture to meet that rate? What, you think having babies is evil or something? That's just more leftist propaganda.

Since you didn't try to refute my point about how a developing human being as embryo or fetus is not "a woman's body" I'll assume you concede the point. Although it would be nice if you were honest enough to say so.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 4222
Join date : 2011-11-09
Location : Þrúðheimr

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Fri May 19, 2017 11:51 am

I agree to your points here, Thrasymachus, at least on general principle -  Fuck it, barring rape-induced cases, before her 6th pregnancy no western woman should even consider abortion.

 

___________
" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "
- Thucydides
Back to top Go down
View user profile Online
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1523
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Fri May 19, 2017 6:15 pm

Thrasymachus wrote:


You're only taking a very one sided view.

How about having enough babies to meet the replacement rate of 2.1 without needing to import millions of people from outside of your own society and culture to meet that rate? What, you think having babies is evil or something? That's just more leftist propaganda.

Since you didn't try to refute my point about how a developing human being as embryo or fetus is not "a woman's body" I'll assume you concede the point. Although it would be nice if you were honest enough to say so.

Of course I am taking a one-sided view. I'm disagreeing with you.

That's what I've been talking about - population control.

No, I don't think having babies is evil. I do think that having twelve babies when you can't even afford yourself and wife a comfortable way of life is stupid.

To have many children in any part of the world where there is already high unemployment is stupid as well.

I do not have the knowledge to state when an egg in a woman's body becomes a human being. Therefore I cannot argue the point.

I have stated many time, prevention first. If an abortion is desired then it should happen within the first three months. But these are just my opinions. It is what I would recommend if I were asked.

It is my opinion also that as long as the fetus is in the woman's body it is a part of the woman's body and not a separate entity.

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3699
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Will to Power

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Fri May 19, 2017 7:13 pm

Quote :
It is my opinion also that as long as the fetus is in the woman's body it is a part of the woman's body and not a separate entity.

Since it has different DNA, it is not at all part of the woman's body.

Yes having a dozen kids when you are poor is stupid.

Quote :
I do not have the knowledge to state when an egg in a woman's body becomes a human being. Therefore I cannot argue the point.

Exactly. No one has that knowledge because that knowledge does not exist. Namely, the entire idea is bullshit to begin with.

And yes, prevention is fine. But, again, you need your society to hit the replacement rate with its own people.

 

___________
"Since the old God has abdicated, I shall rule the world from now on." --Nietzsche

"It would be wise to exercise caution with one's wishes." --Penny Royal AI

Odinwar <---[truth]---> Jeraz

Peace. War. Love. Wordz




“Grow a pair, preferably between your eyes.” -Styxhexenhammer666

104 Qdd5#
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sisyphus
Path
Path


Posts : 1523
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: Abortion   Sat May 20, 2017 6:09 am

Thrasymachus wrote:
Quote :
It is my opinion also that as long as the fetus is in the woman's body it is a part of the woman's body and not a separate entity.

Since it has different DNA, it is not at all part of the woman's body.

Yes having a dozen kids when you are poor is stupid.

Quote :
I do not have the knowledge to state when an egg in a woman's body becomes a human being. Therefore I cannot argue the point.

Exactly. No one has that knowledge because that knowledge does not exist. Namely, the entire idea is bullshit to begin with.

And yes, prevention is fine. But, again, you need your society to hit the replacement rate with its own people.

Nice to see that, although we do not have total agreement, we at least are agreeing to some aspects of this topic.

I really can't go much further with this. I have stated my opinions and understandings. We have different opinions. Fairly natural and normal.

So perhaps we could change the label of "Birth Control" to "Population Management"?

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Abortion   

Back to top Go down
 
Abortion
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Before The Light :: Tree :: Ethics-
Jump to: