A baby is not inside the womb, or anywhere else, without conception. It doesn't exist; therefore it cannot be alive. That's pretty much the point ofcontra-ception. People really need to learn this basic stuff!Yes, we can. A baby inside the womb is alive. What is this nonsense? — Lionino
Helpful advice. Please heed it!You have to learn how to use words correctly before starting an argument. — Lionino
A baby is not inside the womb — Vera Mont
That's pretty much the point ofcontra-ception — Vera Mont
You didn't look at the tutorial - or a dictionary. Take another shot? Human gestation begins at the moment of fertilization (conception) and proceeds to delivery, typically 280 days - approximately 40 weeks or 9 months. During that process, the newly conceived human goes through three stages of development: germinal, embryonic and fetal.The foetus starts after the nineth month and goes until conception. — Lionino
My very point!If you have no clue what the difference between blastocyst and an embryo is, you should not raise your opinion on the topic. — Lionino
Bingo! No conception = no baby!Contraception is preventing the fertilisation of the eggs. — Lionino
The small details, like eyes and lungs are completely formed two weeks before the projected delivery date, though a slightly premature infant may need a little more encouragement to start breathing and can take a bit longer to focus its vision. Premature babies - barring genetic defects and trauma - can survive without technological intervention 6-10 weeks before their due date; with medical help, premies as young as 24 weeks have a survival rate of 60+%.Physiologically, besides small details such as eyes and lungs, a baby the day before it is born is the same as the day after it is born. Killing a foetus one day before it is born is killing a baby. — Lionino
Technically procreating babies will eventually lead to their death
— schopenhauer1
Dumb. — Lionino
No, it is not. You have to learn how to use words correctly before starting an argument. — Lionino
I find this particularly interesting. How this might work.
I've often thought that a key reason people contrive families is to be distracted by an interactive domestic soap opera. — Tom Storm
Still worshipping Algos I see :) — I like sushi
Someone lives for the quip at someone else's expense on philosophy forum — schopenhauer1
• Law of Moses (Torah) c1000 BCE
• Sharia (Quran) 632 CE — 180 Proof
Good timeline, but it was the move to make the code of ethics attributed directly from a singular God of the Universe, who wants humans to act a certain way, that is the innovation (aka ethical monotheism). — schopenhauer1
As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death".At the end of the day, there is no relief, only sleep and death. Everything else is MALIGNANTLY USELESS ... — schopenhauer1
However you wish to interpret the relationship of the Torah to the Quran, they are clearly not "the oldest moral codes" as you've claim (and they are derivatives from pre-Mosaic/non-divine sources). — 180 Proof
There seems to be an aspect of control in this no? You want to control and direct a cohort and see the drama play out for your amusement. — schopenhauer1
Fuck it dude. You can mine the fuck out of the minutia and it still won't get you out of the MALIGNENTLY USELESS dilemma. — schopenhauer1
As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death". — 180 Proof
Absolutely. The indispensible virtue. With courage, cheerful-defiant pessimism (e.g. Nietzsche); without courage, resentful-defeatist pessimism (e.g. Schopenhauer) – singing the blues :death: :flower: or crippling anxiety :cry: :sad: , respectively.Yes. Do you think this requires a type of courage? — Tom Storm
We should realize that arrival at the perfect Utopia is not very probable, but it remains the only truly worthy goal. This it is unwise indeed not to aim at Utopia. — Chet Hawkins
If there were no rules, or chaos, the universe could not organize itself into galaxies, nebulae, suns and planets, compounds, molecules, life forms. From the laws of physics comes all that we are, all that we know. Chaos is not something we can experience. We experience disorientation, confusion, occasional temporary states of befuddlement. Chaos is not something we can see in the world. We witness occasional temporary states of disruption and disturbance in nature and our own organizations; transient events that interrupt the prevailing order. With our very limited access to information, we fail to predict the course of all events in the universe. These observations, the busy human imagination exaggerates into a big, noisy concept like 'chaos'.The thing about chaos is, if there are no rules, there is no real way to proceed, other than whim, desire, chaos. I suppose you could claim that that is the only real rule, that there are none. — Chet Hawkins
It does certainly persist as an idea, a possible goal to achieve. And - carpers and whiners notwithstanding - many humans are fortunate enough and aware enough that between sleep and death, they experience fulfillment, pleasure, comfort, affection, satisfaction, amusement, surprise, awe, even moments of ecstasy. No wonder these happy people wish the same for their fellow humans and strive to bring it about.But Utopia is extant. — Chet Hawkins
Just so.We should realize that arrival at the perfect Utopia is not very probable, but it remains the only truly worthy goal. — Chet Hawkins
I certainly see this argument. And many people don't even get the distraction of the minutia, the quips, the empty achievements. — Tom Storm
@Tom StormAbsolutely. The indispensible virtue. With courage, cheerful-defiant pessimism (e.g. Nietzsche); without courage, resentful-defeatist pessimism (e.g. Schopenhauer) – singing the blues :death: :flower: or crippling anxiety :cry: :sad: , respectively. — 180 Proof
Neither claiming nor implying such, how does "heroism" equate to "masking the reality" when a hero is usually someone who defies reality, fatally risking herself, rather than someone who denies reality? :chin:Masking the reality with heroism — schopenhauer1
No "existential gaslighting" or "performative resiliance" – the fact is, schop, there are philosophies of defiance ("unselfing") such as those mentioned above contrary to sophistries of denial ("suicide") like fideism, anti-natalism or nihilism. :mask:At the end of the day, there is no relief, only sleep and death. Everything else is MALIGNANTLY USELESS...
— schopenhauer1
As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death". — 180 Proof
Neither claiming nor implying such, how does "heroism" equate to "masking the reality" when a hero is usually someone who defies reality, fatally risking herself, rather than someone who denies reality? :chin: — 180 Proof
Stop with the strawman, schop. My counter argument emphasizes the followingThe Nietzschean emphasis ... — schopenhauer1
as I've pointed out in my previous post which your (& T. Ligotti's) special pleading evades. To wit:As daoists, epicureans, pyrrhonists, spinozists, absurdists et al know first-hand: humor & creativity, friendship & compassion also provide "relief" during the often tedious intervals between "sleep and death". — 180 Proof
there are philosophies of defiance ("unselfing") such as those mentioned above contrary to sophistries of denial ("suicide") like fideism, anti-natalism or nihilism. :mask: — 180 Proof
Yeah, like e.g. "anti-natalism" (i.e. destroying the village (h. sapiens) in order to save the village (h. sapiens)) – I agree, schop. After all, "suffering" isn't a "problem to solve" but rather an exigent signal to adapt one's (our) way of life to reality by preventing foreseeable and reducing imminent disvalue/s. :fire:Creating a false narrative cannot solve the problem of suffering. — schopenhauer1
After all, "suffering" isn't a "problem to solve" but rather an exigent signal to adapt one's (our) way of life to reality by preventing foreseeable or reducing some imminent disvalue/s. :fire: — 180 Proof
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.