As said before, this thread is about whether procreation is default wrong due to blah did blah consent (can't be bothered to keep writing it). It is not about Kant. — Bartricks
What insult? I tried to credit you with knowledge, which you finally admitted you have, along with almost every other educated western adult on earth. The insult, if there was one, was in your being disingenuous. — tim wood
The moral obligation is to do one's duty. In the case of a lawyer, that duty may not be intuitively obvious, though it be obvious to reason. — tim wood
You're confusing, I think, the act with the purpose of the act. — tim wood
I have not incorrectly used the term 'Kantian' in referring to the argument I am focusing on in that way. — Bartricks
If you cannot affect someone by creating them, kindly explain how you can affect someone by destroying them - and explain in a way that will not allow me to say the same about creating someone or that will not just involve making some arbitrary stipulation that has no support from reason. — Bartricks
As you think you like logic, here's an argument and you tell me which premise you dispute, or the first premise you dispute if you dispute more than one of them. — Bartricks
That a large portion of our lives will have to be lived under the paternalistic dictactorship of our parents and state authorities is part of what makes forcing someone into this existence such a significant thing to have done to them. — Bartricks
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.