Logik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:47 pm
Age wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:40 pm
I am the one who is saying that harm has to be done. In order to fix or heal some things some times harm has to be done.
Way to miss the forest for the trees.
Do you think amputating a gangrenous leg is 'harm'?
Do you NOT amputating a gangrenous leg is 'harm'?
Which of the above two CHOICES is worse?
I am NOT talking about "worse". 'Harm', to me, is NOT about "worse" or "better".
Logik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:47 pmIf you amputate the leg the person lives.
If you don't amputate the leg the person dies.
So your choice is LITERALLY life or death. But your tiny brain is too focused on the act of amputation.
I was NOT focused on the act of amputation. YOU ARE.
You are so far off track, AGAIN.
And, it is NOT my choice at all. You are the only one here thinking and talking about things like this, so you make the DECISION.
Also, I am NOT sure how it could LITERALLY be life or death, when it is only a hypothetical.
Logik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:47 pm Which is precisely what I mean by taking the burden on yourself'.
Just remember that is what YOU mean. But is that what everyone else MEANS?
Remember if I was talking to you about what YOU wrote, then I would be talking about what you mean. But considering I was NOT talking to YOU about that, then I do NOT really care what you are talking about.
What you are talking about, by the way, has been talked about for centuries, with NO progress I might add.
Logik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:47 pmHarm is an outcome, not an action.
That is what you are talking about. I was NOT. I was NOT talking to you. You just jumped into what I said to some one else and presumed you knew what I was talking about.
You have NOT made your way to answer my simple little clarifying question I asked you before, but yet you have made your way to ASSUME that I was meaning some thing that I WAS NOT, and you have NEVER even made your way to considering to just ask me what I was meaning BEFORE replying and talking ABOUT ME in the way that you have here in this thread.
You used a reply some one else to infer that I have made an error, which is based solely upon an ASSUMPTION made up solely by YOU. That ASSUMPTION, which you made up by yourself, is TOTALLY WRONG by the way, if you are still UNAWARE.
It does NOT help you to ASSUME that the way you use words is the exact same way that others are using the same words. You will inevitable become unstuck, which can be witnessed many times with your discussions with, and about, me.
Logik wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:47 pmAge wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 1:40 pm
By the way nothing I have said has any thing at all to do with the so called "trolley problem". Besides the fact that there is no problem at all here, all of these hypotheticals do not have much at all to do with reality anyway. To me there are just way to many variables to be looked at in those hypotheticals for them to be of any use to any one.
You really do need to start reading the actual words that I write BEFORE making these WRONG assumptions and conclusions that continually keep making.
It has everything to do with trolley problems.
Do you amputate a gangrenous leg or not?
It all depends. Tell me ALL of the situation and I can give you an answer. But anyway, THIS has NOTHING to do with what I have been talking about when I use the word 'harm', which by the way you have NEVER clarified from what perspective I am coming from.
You have, once again, just made up your OWN assumption, jumped to your OWN conclusion, and just BELIEVED your OWN story, which you have made up all alone, and then continued on down that lonesome track.