Infanticide

[Nick_A]

Again, if there are no eternal values and we only live by subjective values, give me a subjective intellectual reason, not legal, why a mother shouldn't kill her week old completely dependent baby for convenience if she no longer wants to be bothered with it?

That's a tricky one, Nick_A. Why don't you show us how it's done, by showing us your "subjective intellectual reason" for why you think there are "eternal values".

This is like asking the impossible. I am supposed to explain the question of of universals to a person closed to the idea. Plato's forms are ideas. A perfect circle is an idea but it doesn't exist for us. Eternal values are like that. Justice is a universal idea; an eternal value which doesn't exist for us since we remain unaware of what the essence of all our subjective conceptions of justice is. You will continue arguing subjective conceptions of justice and other eternal values while others will try to open their minds in the direction of the forms. I support those, especially the young, with minds trying to open but receiving the scorn of the Great Beast as its representatives continue to argue subjective interpretations.

[Dubious]

Again, if there are no eternal values and we only live by subjective values, give me a subjective intellectual reason, not legal, why a mother shouldn't kill her week old completely dependent baby for convenience if she no longer wants to be bothered with it?

That's a tricky one, Nick_A. Why don't you show us how it's done, by showing us your "subjective intellectual reason" for why you think there are "eternal values".

This is like asking the impossible. I am supposed to explain the question of of universals to a person closed to the idea. Plato's forms are ideas. A perfect circle is an idea but it doesn't exist for us. Eternal values are like that. Justice is a universal idea; an eternal value which doesn't exist for us since we remain unaware of what the essence of all our subjective conceptions of justice is. You will continue arguing subjective conceptions of justice and other eternal values while others will try to open their minds in the direction of the forms. I support those, especially the young, with minds trying to open but receiving the scorn of the Great Beast as its representatives continue to argue subjective interpretations.

In short, a total abstraction with NO application!

[Greta]

Again, if there are no eternal values and we only live by subjective values, give me a subjective intellectual reason, not legal, why a mother shouldn't kill her week old completely dependent baby for convenience if she no longer wants to be bothered with it?

Culture. Don't underestimate the power of culture, the residual power of the past to influence today.

Now we are so conditioned from birth not to commit atrocities that it's simply unthinkable. A two thousand year-old Middle Eastern book of myths is no longer needed as a moral guide.

Also note instinct, our intrinsic nature. In no society in the world would a mother kill her young infant out of convenience. Most had never heard of Christianity or the Bible. Why do you think that was the case? How could disparate people everyone develop morality without access to the Bible or even reference to its existence?

A second question to help clarify understanding of the first: why does a mother crocodile gently carry her young in her mouth and not eat them?

[Nick_A]

Plato wrote that Man is a being in search of Meaning

Dubious apparently believes that Man’s search for meaning is “a total abstraction with NO application!”

Application based on subjective values has the advantage of the modern belief in creating ones own values. It has replaced the archaic notion of eternal values. This modern approach clears up the ancient controversy on what respect for life means. We see that it has no objective meaning. This leaves us free to practice abortion and infanticide with nothing but the application of remaining archaic laws to worry about.

As the concern for practical application makes the search for meaning obsolete people will be gradually introduced into right thinking. Of course there will always be wrong thinkers like Simone Weil and Nick_A who will oppose progress. Those like SoB teach us what is necessary to do with these people especially the young going down the wrong road. SoB wrote:

Yes they can, when they place him in one of those white jackets with the long sleeves that tie in the back. And then of course there's the anti-delusional cocktail that his, so called, thinking so obviously requires.

Right thinkers know that objective meaning is created by the state. All right thinker should only concern themselves with is application. There is no reason to doubt and search for meaning.There is no longer any reason to doubt. The Great Beast has provided the truth and it governments will supply the means for progress. Become a right thinker and create your own reality. Earn the approval of the secular progressives who define meaning. You will then fit in and live happily ever after.

Get the kids early. Give them drugs if they are attracted to politically incorrect ideas and institutionalize them if necessary. Just don’t leave them as is. They cannot be tolerated since such ideas slow progress into the ideal society

[Greta]

Plato wrote that Man is a being in search of Meaning

Dubious apparently believes that Man’s search for meaning is “a total abstraction with NO application!”

Application based on subjective values has the advantage of the modern belief in creating ones own values. It has replaced the archaic notion of eternal values. This modern approach clears up the ancient controversy on what respect for life means. We see that it has no objective meaning. This leaves us free to practice abortion and infanticide with nothing but the application of remaining archaic laws to worry about.

Wow - you entirely ignored what I said above and claimed the opposite as if the post had not been made. What on earth is wrong with you? Can't you see how oddly inflexible and obsessive your response was after the previous post?

I am bored with weak and circular arguments. I raised valid questions in the post above that have not been addressed in the least. Address them, as opposed to the illogical unfounded claims and rhetorical gaming of your above post, and you will warrant a reply.

[Dubious]

Plato wrote that Man is a being in search of Meaning

Dubious apparently believes that Man’s search for meaning is “a total abstraction with NO application!”

Not so! Man's search for meaning has nothing to do with the vapid inconsequential abstractions you so obsessively espouse. Humans can only imagine what Eternal Values are because in the universe there is no such thing, only the paradigms by which it operates. Values of ANY KIND don't mean a thing to it.

Eternal values are imagined, dreamt and speculated upon by ephemeral beings creating images of eternity in negation of their transience; in that sense it has meaning to the individual as incorporated and defined in Culture...which ONLY humans create.

[Nick_A]

Greta

Culture. Don't underestimate the power of culture, the residual power of the past to influence today.

Now we are so conditioned from birth not to commit atrocities that it's simply unthinkable. A two thousand year-old Middle Eastern book of myths is no longer needed as a moral guide.

Where have you been hiding? Haven’t you heard of Isis and the atrocities it is responsible for?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/07/03 ... calls.html

Yes, the results of education. People are not born with such a compulsion to kill. Only educated people would kill in this way

Also note instinct, our intrinsic nature. In no society in the world would a mother kill her young infant out of convenience. Most had never heard of Christianity or the Bible. Why do you think that was the case? How could disparate people everyone develop morality without access to the Bible or even reference to its existence?

It is convenient to accept and obey the state as the provider of morals. If the state wants a mother to kill her baby who is she to defy accepted morality?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/me ... de_1.shtml

Is female infanticide unfair? The state believes female babies should be killed. Since fairness is a big characteristic of progressive thought only killing female babies must be opposed. How long will it be until the fair compromise is reached to satisfy the impulse to create our own reality? An equal amount of male babies should be killed to make the killing fair. Once again secular eductation will triumph

A second question to help clarify understanding of the first: why does a mother crocodile gently carry her young in her mouth and not eat them?

Quite true. A mother croc would not kill for convenience. It would have to be educated before it could defy instinct. We are educated to accept infanticide for convenience. If not, it wouldn’t happen. It is not natural for a human mother to kill her baby for convenience. The ability to do so must be acquired through cultural education. The mother created her own reality that the baby lacked value. Why not kill it

[Nick_A]

Plato wrote that Man is a being in search of Meaning

Dubious apparently believes that Man’s search for meaning is “a total abstraction with NO application!”

Not so! Man's search for meaning has nothing to do with the vapid inconsequential abstractions you so obsessively espouse. Humans can only imagine what Eternal Values are because in the universe there is no such thing, only the paradigms by which it operates. Values of ANY KIND don't mean a thing to it.

Eternal values are imagined, dreamt and speculated upon by ephemeral beings creating images of eternity in negation of their transience; in that sense it has meaning to the individual as incorporated and defined in Culture...which ONLY humans create.

So if there are no eternal values it means we create our own values. What is wrong with a woman who has created her own value that some people especially babies lack value? How can you say she is wrong? She created her own reality that her baby lacks value so she killed it. Why not? What if anything is wrong with her reasoning?

[Greta]

Greta

Culture. Don't underestimate the power of culture, the residual power of the past to influence today.

Now we are so conditioned from birth not to commit atrocities that it's simply unthinkable. A two thousand year-old Middle Eastern book of myths is no longer needed as a moral guide.

Where have you been hiding? Haven’t you heard of Isis and the atrocities it is responsible for?

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/07/03 ... calls.html

Yes, the results of education. People are not born with such a compulsion to kill. Only educated people would kill in this way

I note that you judge humans by their most extreme and sick, and ignore the vast decent majority as though they didn't matter.

I also note that those committing the worst atrocities are those taking their moral cues from a Middle Eastern book of myths.

I also note that more eduction brings more peaceableness, not more aggression. This is because education the capacity to resolve conflicts of interest without resorting to violence.

I note that you get your "news" from Fox, which is in accord with your jaundiced and angry view of humanity, your antipathy towards education and belief that a two thousand year-old Middle Eastern book of myths is needed as a moral guide for modern humans to keep them from what you assume is a common desire to kill babies.

Also note instinct, our intrinsic nature. In no society in the world would a mother kill her young infant out of convenience. Most had never heard of Christianity or the Bible. Why do you think that was the case? How could disparate people everyone develop morality without access to the Bible or even reference to its existence?

It is convenient to accept and obey the state as the provider of morals. If the state wants a mother to kill her baby who is she to defy accepted morality?

It is always superstition that drives infanticide of female babies. Education is the cure, not the cause.

If not for education you would not have the capacity to criticise - so much that you take for granted.

A second question to help clarify understanding of the first: why does a mother crocodile gently carry her young in her mouth and not eat them?

Quite true. A mother croc would not kill for convenience. It would have to be educated before it could defy instinct. We are educated to accept infanticide for convenience. If not, it wouldn’t happen. It is not natural for a human mother to kill her baby for convenience. The ability to do so must be acquired through cultural education. The mother created her own reality that the baby lacked value. Why not kill it.

It's an odd thing about Christians I meet online - they do not believe in love. They speak as though they don't believe that love can possibly exist, whereas it's the most powerful drive we have. Education, like all tools, can be useful or harmful. Your complaints about it are ridiculous. Would you rather that the whole world of humans remain ignorant and superstitious?

So education may increase that love through greater understanding or diminish love through objectification - the former if we see another as family, friend or peer, and the latter if they are seen as competition or food.

[Arising_uk]

...
We see that it has no objective meaning. This leaves us free to practice abortion and infanticide with nothing but the application of remaining archaic laws to worry about. ...

And yet your ancient Greeks practised both abortion and infanticide, how do you explain this when they held these 'eternal values'?

[Nick_A]

...
We see that it has no objective meaning. This leaves us free to practice abortion and infanticide with nothing but the application of remaining archaic laws to worry about. ...

And yet your ancient Greeks practised both abortion and infanticide, how do you explain this when they held these 'eternal values'?

Greece was not a super civilization. If it had been, Socrates wouldn't have been killed. Most fought eternal values as hard as you do

[Nick_A]

Greta

It is always superstition that drives infanticide of female babies. Education is the cure, not the cause.

If not for education you would not have the capacity to criticise - so much that you take for granted.

We have learned from modern secular and New Age education that we create our own reality. Who are you to say that your truth is better than the truths of those committing female infanticide? Who are you to say that your education is superior to theirs? That is very elitist of you.

[Greta]

Greta

It is always superstition that drives infanticide of female babies. Education is the cure, not the cause.

If not for education you would not have the capacity to criticise - so much that you take for granted.

We have learned from modern secular and New Age education that we create our own reality. Who are you to say that your truth is better than the truths of those committing female infanticide? Who are you to say that your education is superior to theirs? That is very elitist of you.

Who is to say that the Bible, which free exhorts slavery and untrammelled murder, provides a useful truth to that end?

In case you haven't noticed, today we have laws that prevent murder. Did you notice that? Thus, there is already codification of morality, so your Bible is increasingly superseded as a relic and an unfortunate source of much wickedness and misery due to the literal and universal interpretations of metaphorical and culturally specific texts.

[Nick_A]

Greta

It is always superstition that drives infanticide of female babies. Education is the cure, not the cause.

If not for education you would not have the capacity to criticise - so much that you take for granted.

We have learned from modern secular and New Age education that we create our own reality. Who are you to say that your truth is better than the truths of those committing female infanticide? Who are you to say that your education is superior to theirs? That is very elitist of you.

Who is to say that the Bible, which free exhorts slavery and untrammelled murder, provides a useful truth to that end?

In case you haven't noticed, today we have laws that prevent murder. Did you notice that? Thus, there is already codification of morality, so your Bible is increasingly superseded as a relic and an unfortunate source of much wickedness and misery due to the literal and universal interpretations of metaphorical and culturally specific texts.

So for you infanticide is only wrong because of laws dictated by the state. Since there are no eternal values only the state can give life value where it believes it is warranted. Very Progressive. I wonder where it will lead and who the next group will be determined to be without value. As long as boys and girls are killed equally as the fair thing to do, what else matters?

[Greta]

Greta



We have learned from modern secular and New Age education that we create our own reality. Who are you to say that your truth is better than the truths of those committing female infanticide? Who are you to say that your education is superior to theirs? That is very elitist of you.

Who is to say that the Bible, which free exhorts slavery and untrammelled murder, provides a useful truth to that end?

In case you haven't noticed, today we have laws that prevent murder. Did you notice that? Thus, there is already codification of morality, so your Bible is increasingly superseded as a relic and an unfortunate source of much wickedness and misery due to the literal and universal interpretations of metaphorical and culturally specific texts.

So for you infanticide is only wrong because of laws dictated by the state. Since there are no eternal values only the state can give life value where it believes it is warranted. Very Progressive. I wonder where it will lead and who the next group will be determined to be without value. As long as boys and girls are killed equally as the fair thing to do, what else matters?

Oh, for fuck's sake! I pointed out just five hours ago that love was what kept us from killing babies. That is just five posts ago - yet you completely disregard it.

Since you appear not to have the intellect to retain or understand what is said, here it is in nice big print which you may find easier to comprehend:

It's an odd thing about Christians I meet online - they do not believe in love. They speak as though they don't believe that love can possibly exist, whereas it's the most powerful drive we have. Education, like all tools, can be useful or harmful. Your complaints about it are ridiculous. Would you rather that the whole world of humans remain ignorant and superstitious?

So education may increase that love through greater understanding or diminish love through objectification - the former if we see another as family, friend or peer, and the latter if they are seen as competition or food.