how do we survive our soul crushing world?

[Iwannaplato]

If you kill a bug so that it doesn't suck your blood and give you a disease, then by the measure of life the significance of that action is that you value your life, over the bug's need to suck your blood and live. Apply the same reasoning to abortion.

This is the objective basis, this is the rationale if you will, that determines each individual, subjective need for abortion.

What you explained about the bug here is fairly clear. Thank you.
My take is that for someone to get your positions from what I quote below would be miraculous. In fact it sounds like the Joy of B would replace the joy of sex or keep them from having sex, since they would have the Joy of B, if anything.
That said, I doubt that Maia is going to like your analogy very much. She already identified with the bug in response to others.

They should be indoctrinated and brainwashed, right from the cradle, just as they are now. Same methods, different content.

From that basis of indoctrination, they can find their own way to the troof, once they have become self-aware as independent, self-sustaining entities in the universe ... just like they do now. Same life, same folks, same methods of teaching, but a different content. A content of population control via mind control. Is such a thing possible in the name of goodness, or is the act of manipulating a population itself something that is not good? It is possible to do, though, and the proof is oddball mass appeals, such as plastic surgery.

How to answer the question? Judge the content in terms of the ultimate measure, which is Life.

Begin with an intellectual, proper, study of Brahmacharya.

The Joy of Brahmacharya far outshines the Joy of Sex, and we're not talking shallow, superficial sex. Instill that in a child early and before you know it, they are tops in academics, sports, music. It's truly a miracle to behold. 'Tis the appropriate channeling of all that energy.

*

Note: I also stressed a proper study of Brahmacharya. That is not under these conditions, so save your speculation that originates from other than a proper study. How's that for layin' it on? You see, your attitude is another element inappropriate to a proper study, Pal.

Consider the possibility, and here I think is another example of it, that you are not communicating as well as you think and blame the results of this on others.

[Walker]

Consider the possibility, and here I think is another example of it, that you are not communicating as well as you think and blame the results of this on others.

Is that right. Well consider, on top of what I've said, that you wouldn’t want me explaining under inappropriate conditions to an inappropriate attitude because then my advice can trend towards inappropriateness and offer no other guidance than to f*** off, which can be of benefit if not taken personally, because the purpose of such a suggestion, such an offering, is to steer ignorance already displayed, elsewhere, where it could be of better use.

[Iwannaplato]

Consider the possibility, and here I think is another example of it, that you are not communicating as well as you think and blame the results of this on others.

Is that right. Well consider, on top of what I've said, that you wouldn’t want me explaining under inappropriate conditions to an inappropriate attitude because then my advice can trend towards inappropriateness and offer no other guidance than to f*** off, which can be of benefit if not taken personally, because the purpose of such a suggestion, such an offering,is to steer ignorance already displayed, elsewhere, where it could be of better use.

Or, you sort of like coming off like you have great insights and it's kinda cool to throw around long words in a foreign language and in general you get off on not being very clear, cause if what you just said above was true, it was fucking idiocy opening the door to the topic with a cryptic non-informative post. You managed to, finally, follow it up with something that was more clear, and presumably given all the careful responsibility you are claiming to take in this post, that did no-one any harm. So, either start by trying to communicate instead of posing or don't open a door you now seem to think is so potentially irresponsible to open.

This kind of posturing that you just keep extending....No. I was going to say it might be effective with some of the children here, but actually I think they'll reject it for other reasons than I do.

is to steer ignorance already displayed, elsewhere, where it could be of better use.

It's good you've found better use for ignorance. Kudos.

[Walker]

is to steer ignorance already displayed, elsewhere, where it could be of better use.

It's good you've found better use for ignorance. Kudos.

Yes, that's why one tells another to f*** off. It's so they can take their ignorance, elsewhere.
This view is totally appropriate under conditions where 81 million Brandon voters can exist.
The better use for such ignorance is often to go play word games somewhere.

[Iwannaplato]

is to steer ignorance already displayed, elsewhere, where it could be of better use.

It's good you've found better use for ignorance. Kudos.

Yes, that's why one tells another to f*** off. It's so they can take their ignorance, elsewhere.
This view is totally appropriate under conditions where 81 million Brandon voters can exist.
The better use for such ignorance is often to go play word games somewhere.

Brandon voter??? Seriously, you've moved into the stupid realm, which despite how irritating I think you are I never would have expected. I wouldn't vote for B at gunpoint. Though who knows why you toss in random shit.

What I have seen is a variety of excuses for not responding to points made, with as much hints about your high opinion of yourself as possible.
It happened in another thread where you just had no need to justify yourself, and tried to shift the onus to me to disprove your opinions that you simply, because you are you, I guess, get to claim are facts so they don't need to be supported, I finally said what the fuck I'll take on the onus because it'll be a field day showing the orginal post was an opinion piece.....
viewtopic.php?p=582888#p582888
followed by silence from you.

Now here in this thread your cryptic non-posts where I again point out the obvious and do make an argument why your use of a term is strange, you add on cryptic posts implying some superspecial knowledge on your part that includes the application knowledge that you shouldn't even explain yourself (to certain people, to me, who knows) because it would be inappropriate.

You seem to just like proclaiming a bunch of stuff and not having to support it.

Maybe you are special and no one should question your opinions, but since you're a dick about it and contradict yourself without noticing it, it's much better to just ignore you. Whether you are so far ahead (your opinion) or so far behind doesn't really matter: either way it's a waste of time. And someone who was so far ahead would know this. Leaving us with......to be charitable... posing. Cause I don't think, in the end, you're not smart.

On ignore.

[iambiguous]

Note to others:

In regard to the issue of killing and abortion and surviving in a "soul crushing world", I made two substantive points to Walker above:

1]

Of course, lucky for you, you are not likely to get pregnant yourself.

Right?

You are not likely to face "the agony of choice in the face of uncertainty" that many women do when confronted with an unwanted pregnancy. Because of rape, because of incestuous rape...when giving birth might jeopardize your physical and mental health, when the newborn baby is afflicted with one or another ghastly God-given health condition, when being forced to give birth takes you out of school, causes you to lose your job, brings havoc to your life.

And how far do you take this pro-life stand? Suppose a woman you know and love has an abortion in a place where it is illegal? Do you turn her in? Do you stand by the state convicting her of first-degree murder...sending her to prison. As long as they don't sentence her to death?

2]

Like going to the Bible and reading "thou shalt not kill"...only with an * after it.

* Except when God kills:

To wit:

"Fifteen to twenty percent of all pregnancies (or approximately 1 million a year in the U.S.) will end in a miscarriage or stillbirth."

Your God perchance?

God's own abortions let's call them.

Which, in my own opinion, he keeps "wiggling" out of responding to.

I mentioned bugs above only in order to note just how far some will go in regard to killing living things.

Meanwhile the gap between killing bugs -- pregnant bugs? -- and killing what some construe to be unborn human beings...?

How wide a gap is that for...Walker?

[Walker]

Meanwhile the gap between killing bugs -- pregnant bugs? -- and killing what some construe to be unborn human beings...?

Indeed. Someone is at least capable of comprehending an analogy. However glasshopper, take it higher* or else forever be doomed to mendacity.

In other words, Look to the principle. Walker is not the principle, and Walker don't wiggle.

The principle can be found in the form of a question, and the question is:

For a woman who aborts her child, what is the difference between stepping on a zygote, and stepping on a bug?

Apparently ... none.


* I understand your difficulty in taking it higher, a difficulty caused by habitually peering at the person while jargoning in place of pursuing the principle, however, do endeavour to persevere.

[Walker]

Question: how do we survive our soul crushing world?

Answer: go fishing.

Q: Who taught you to fish, glasshopper?
A: Grandpa.
Q: What was your bait?
A: Grasshoppers.

[iambiguous]

Meanwhile the gap between killing bugs -- pregnant bugs? -- and killing what some construe to be unborn human beings...?

Indeed. Someone is at least capable of comprehending an analogy. However glasshopper, take it higher* or else forever be doomed to mendacity.

In other words, Look to the principle. Walker is not the principle, and Walker don't wiggle.

The principle can be found in the form of a question, and the question is:

For a woman who aborts her child, what is the difference between stepping on a zygote, and stepping on a bug?

Apparently ... none.


* I understand your difficulty in taking it higher, a difficulty caused by habitually peering at the person while jargoning in place of pursuing the principle, however, do endeavour to persevere.

Note to others:

All I can point out once again is how demoralizing it is to leave ILP where posts of this sort are now the rule and to come here...to a philosophy forum derived from Philosophy Now magazine...and encounter posts that, in my own opinion, are so utterly lacking in substance.

Walker needs to ask himself why he keeps avoiding actually responding to the points I raise above. And why, since he does, he bothers responding to me at all.

Yes, it could be a "condition" of course. Philosophy forums online do seem to attract those afflicted with them. So, it may well be "beyond his control".

On the other hand, it is still within my control to stop responding to them.

So, I will.

[Walker]

Note to others:

Walker needs to ask himself why he keeps avoiding actually responding to the points I raise above.

Note to others:
How does one affix an ear to asshole, so that it hears?

Your points have been answered. Swab out those ears, Swabby. An abortionist sees no difference between stepping on a zygote and stepping on a bug, even if it's a pregnant bug. That's because abortionists are science deniers and so deny that stage of human development, by equating the significance of a budding human to a bug's life.

Note to others:
It's so disappointing when assholes wander in off the street from ILP land, with all their delusions.

[Walker]

"how do we survive our soul crushing world?"

Identify the assholes, that's how.

[iambiguous]

Note to others:

I will no longer be reading Walkers posts here. I'm convinced he must have a "condition" that compels him to post as he does. On the other hand, that's just my own personal opinion...a point of view no less derived subjectively from dasein.

Your experiences with him may be different.

So, sure, if he does post something you think might be of interest to me, by all means, pass it along.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Walker: How does one affix an ear to asshole, so that it hears?

Your points have been answered. Swab out those ears, Swabby. An abortionist sees no difference between stepping on a zygote and stepping on a bug, even if it's a pregnant bug. That's because abortionists are science deniers and so deny that stage of human development, by equating the significance of a budding human to a bug's life.


K: https://www.swarthmore.edu/news-events/ ... hood-begin

Interesting article...

and to your point that ''abortionist are science deniers".. I find that interesting...
if life begins at conception. is it the physical body what we are looking at?
if all life is sacred and we must protect all "life" than how do you justify
the "Death penalty?" or a better question is, why aren't you forcing everyone
to be a vegetarian? If life is so sacred, then why not force everyone to avoid
anything with meat.. as animals clearly meets that criterion of being
"Life at birth" ... why is killing animals acceptable and killing humans is not?

another example is at conception, what do you see.. exactly?
you see a bunch of cells but how do can you tell the difference be animals
cells and human cells, right at conception, how do you identify animal zygotes
from human zygotes?

medically, a zygote doesn't turn into a fetus until much later after fertilization
(roughly 10 weeks of pregnancy or 8 weeks after fertilization)
the embryo will turn into what's known as a fetus... so is a zygote, a person,
especially considering that we have no way to tell the difference between
a human zygote and an animal zygote, for weeks after conception....

human pregnancy happens all the time, and yet it is actually rare that
a pregnancy goes from conception to birth.. my mom for example,
had 12 miscarriages on top of having 5 children.. according to your theory,
my mom is a mass murderer from events completely out of her control...

and how do you work out the problem that a fetus is unable to
survive outside of the womb before 22/23 weeks... can that fetus
actually be considered to be life if it can't survive on its own for 22 weeks after
conception?

Kropotkin

[Walker]

Note to others:

I will no longer be reading Walkers posts here. I'm convinced he must have a "condition" that compels him to post as he does. On the other hand, that's just my own personal opinion...a point of view no less derived subjectively from dasein.

Your experiences with him may be different.

So, sure, if he does post something you think might be of interest to me, by all means, pass it along.

Note to others ...

Yawn.

[Walker]

... zygote ...

I’ve simply supplied the abortionist's objective reasoning.
The abortionist's view.

To the abortionist, a zygote carries the same significance as a bug’s life.

You seem to urgently require justification for that view.
I suspect that anyone who does require justification for that equation of zygote = bug, really knows the significance of a zygote, knows that it is much more significant than even a pregnant bug, and so is urgently rationalizing away that knowing. The urgency is caused by "desperate" circumstances, and because zygotes do what they gotta do, which is act as a ticking bomb in the plot-line of life.