the ethics of abortion

[Skepdick]

Morality has nothing to do with enabling life, but in maintaining it. Life prior to or otherwise without it is mere existence at best.

Who's talking about enablement? I am talking about dependencies.

What is there to maintain if you didn't exist?

[bahman]

There is no circle. The answer to this question is by asking the wisest. Who is the wisest? The one who has the right solution to a situation. Of course, the meaning of any word becomes cicular at the end but we know what we are talking about.

So if the right solution to a situation is to abort the baby, and the mother has that solution, then the mother is the wisest?

Yes.

[bahman]

Again, "they deserve equity" doesn't follow from any fact.

It does. Minds are fundamentally similar.

Which implies nothing by way of normatives (shoulds/oughts)

People think wrong about many things.

[Terrapin Station]

It does. Minds are fundamentally similar.

Which implies nothing by way of normatives (shoulds/oughts)

People think wrong about many things.

That doesn't help "minds are fundamentally similar" imply a normative.

[Skepdick]

That doesn't help "minds are fundamentally similar" imply a normative.

It really does. If all minds are "fundamentally similar" in their abhorrence and punishment of murder, then over time, one expects to observe a decrease in murder.

One expects non-murder to normalise/maximise through the system.

I am using the word "normative" in the sense of "prevalence of murder as time approaches infinity", as commonly understood in Ergodic theory.

Which sense are you using it in? Queue sophist distinction between "will" and "ought".

[bahman]

That doesn't help "minds are fundamentally similar" imply a normative.

It really does. If all minds are "fundamentally similar" in their abhorrence and punishment of murder, then over time, one expects to observe a decrease in murder.

One expects non-murder to normalise/maximise through the system.

I am using the word "normative" in the sense of "prevalence of murder as time approaches infinity", as commonly understood in Ergodic theory.

Which sense are you using it in? Queue sophist distinction between "will" and "ought".

Could you please elaborate?

[Skepdick]

Could you please elaborate?

Normative beliefs have empirical/testable consequences.

It's not a question of "Ought there be less murder?", it's a question of "Will there be less murder?"

The answer is "Yes, there will be less murder because by and large there exists a normative belief that there ought to be less murder."

Homicides - Our World in Data 2021-01-29 00-00-38.png (57.14 KiB) Viewed 1591 times

[bahman]

Could you please elaborate?

Normative beliefs have empirical/testable consequences.

It's not a question of "Ought there be less murder?", it's a question of "Will there be less murder?"

The answer is "Yes, there will be less murder because by and large there exists a normative belief that there ought to be less murder."

Homicides - Our World in Data 2021-01-29 00-00-38.png

Is the normative belief is that we are equal?

[Skepdick]

Is the normative belief is that we are equal?

What testable consequences does equality produce?

[bahman]

Is the normative belief is that we are equal?

What testable consequences does equality produce?

You can ask people whether they feel equal to others, socially, economically, etc.? The answer is of course not in the majority I think now.

[Advocate]

Moral equality is the premise that everyone should have the means and assistance necessary to pursue being their best selves.

[Skepdick]

You can ask people whether they feel equal to others, socially, economically, etc.? The answer is of course not in the majority I think now.

It's not a yes/no answer though - it's a sliding scale.

Are you less likely to be murdered in 2021 than in 1300? Yes.
Are you enjoying more equality in 2021 than in 1300? Yes.

Hell yea! Life sucked for non-royalty back then.

[Skepdick]

Moral equality is the premise that everyone should have the means and assistance necessary to pursue being their best selves.

So we are more equal in 2021 than we've ever been?

Seems like we are headed the right way then. Just like murder.

Here you are, fucking around on an internet forum instead of farming the lands of some feudal lord.

[bahman]

You can ask people whether they feel equal to others, socially, economically, etc.? The answer is of course not in the majority I think now.

It's not a yes/no answer though - it's a sliding scale.

Are you less likely to be murdered in 2021 than in 1300? Yes.
Are you enjoying more equality in 2021 than in 1300? Yes.

Hell yea! Life sucked for non-royalty back then.

Good to hear that.