Your argument is built upon making those things extreme. — Christoffer
Abortion is about your own body, — Christoffer
Bodily autonomy is irrelevant if you risk hurting or killing other people. — Christoffer
I am taking the ideas you are proposing and taking them to their logical conclusions.
You seem to believe sometimes it is fine for people to suffer as a result of one's desires and sometimes it is not.
So far you have been unable to explain what the determining factor is. — Tzeentch
And the body of one's unborn child, of course. — Tzeentch
Of course it isn't. The flu kills hundreds of thousands every year but we don't infringe upon people's rights to bodily autonomy because they may carry the flu. — Tzeentch
I'll propose something radical: if one is afraid that being sneezed on will kill them, they're the one who should be isolating themselves. — Tzeentch
By driving a car normally you do not actively do something reckless. — Christoffer
Covid-19 isn't the flu. — Christoffer
That is the same as saying that if I decide to go out and throw sharp rocks at other people, it's not my responsibility or moral issue because if people are afraid of being hit by rocks they should just stay home and not go out when I'm out. Their fear is not my fear, so I don't care. — Christoffer
Whenever you step behind the wheel, you are actively accepting the risk of killing someone. The risk is small, sure, but your label of 'reckless' or 'not reckless' is obviously subjective. — Tzeentch
I did not claim otherwise. — Tzeentch
Except that not throwing rocks does not incur any risks for the thrower. So it is not the same. — Tzeentch
No, you don't take reckless action. All actions in the world have risks, but taking an active reckless action is not the same as taking an action that has potential risks. Ignoring the pandemic, ignoring the vaccine is actively a direct reckless choice. — Christoffer
You directly compared it to the flu. — Christoffer
facts matter. — Christoffer
This is why you are all over the place, you don't have a consistent counterargument to my conclusion, it's grasping at straws. — Christoffer
Explain the difference, then. — Tzeentch
Of course. I did not state it was the flu, however. — Tzeentch
And you, of course, a self-styled expert in all matters concering facts. — Tzeentch
I've actually asked you some pretty straightforward questions which you've been avoiding.
On a philosophy forum few people will be impressed by these sorts of proclamations of victory. — Tzeentch
One is an act that can have risks, one is a reckless act that can have direct serious risks. — Christoffer
Just as an example, your comparison with the flu that you then point out that you didn't state that Covid was the same as the flu, but still use as a comparison to make... what point exactly? Why make the comparison to the flu? For what reason? — Christoffer
On a philosophy forum, few people will be impressed by your sloppy philosophical scrutiny. — Christoffer
When you step into a car, you may crash into someone. How is that not direct and serious, and not just as much of a reckless action as interacting with people without being vaccinated? — Tzeentch
Because both cause many deaths, yet the flu is accepted as normal, yet in the case of covid-19 people start questioning fundamental human rights like bodily autonomy. — Tzeentch
There's a reason I didn't respond to the rest of your post — Tzeentch
The choice to "drive a car" is not the same as crashing into someone. — Christoffer
They are fundamentally different in mortality rate, — Christoffer
You argue that both hits are the same, so why would you need body armor if a slap and a sledgehammer are fundamentally just me hitting you? That's your logic right there, examine it. — Christoffer
So we're at a standstill until you can grasp the basics of this. — Christoffer
And similarly, not being vaccinated and breaking regulations is not the same as killing or even infecting someone with covid-19. — Tzeentch
"I agree with the rules and therefore everyone that doesn't follow them I label as reckless." Of course, anyone who disagrees on the science or the rules you would probably regard as being wrong, because you think the science is conclusive: it isn't. — Tzeentch
Anyway, fine. You're putting a lot of faith in whoever made those rules. — Tzeentch
They may weigh things against each other and have different ideas as to what acceptable risks are. There's a subjectivity to all of this that you are not taking into account, that I am trying to make clear to y — Tzeentch
Different? Yes. Fundamentally different? Up for debate. Where I live it certainly is not fundamentally different from a heavy flu. — Tzeentch
No, that's your logic. Don't put words in my mouth. — Tzeentch
I don't think we're at a standstill. You are, however, conducting yourself like a child. — Tzeentch
It's the same as driving recklessly, with a blindfold, or intoxicated. — Christoffer
The rules are based on scientific knowledge and facts. — Christoffer
These are scientific facts, and disagreeing with them is disagreeing with reality itself. — Christoffer
You don't give a shit about facts, you don't understand the science, you don't understand statistical analysis of different risk levels. — Christoffer
I don't care for anyone's opinion if that opinion has nothing to do with rationality, logic, facts and reason. — Christoffer
I'm done. I'm tired of this forum and how my will to discuss philosophy always gets hijacked by people like you. — Christoffer
No, it isn't. Is there no such thing as common sense and using one's own judgement in your world view? — Tzeentch
You are ignoring the fact that science has been wrong numerous times during this pandemic. Remember how Covid-19 was initially ranked among diseases like Ebola, something which was in hindsight clearly wrong? — Tzeentch
That is fine. That is how science works — Tzeentch
Science also tells us the restrictions and vaccinations come at a cost, and opinions on whether the costs weigh against the benefits of (some of) the restrictions vary. But you seem to have a low tolerance of opinions other than your own. — Tzeentch
I do care about facts, but I may weigh those facts differently than you. — Tzeentch
That's your issue, isn't it? What are you doing on a philosophy forum if you're incapable of accepting that people can look at the same facts as you do and come to different conclusions, let alone have a normal discussion about it. — Tzeentch
"There is no subjectivity in my science". — Tzeentch
Maybe you wouldn't burn yourself out if half your post wasn't angry ranting. — Tzeentch
This has nothing to do with the logic — Christoffer
Could it have to do with the fact that if it was approved, the vaccine rollout would likely be halted and the pharmaceutical companies fail to make the unprecendented profit they stand to make from the vaccines? — Janus
To justify forcing your beliefs onto others, simply because you are afraid, puts you on par with pretty much every dictator ever. — Book273
"I will do this, and don't worry, you will thank me later" Said the church as they took people's children, burned down places of worship, and set about destroying "the heathen", "to save them from ignorance." — Book273
I assume you justify rape as saying that those who refuse to engage in consensual sex are against the continuation of humanity and are therefore guilty of complicit genocide, therefore, for the security of procreation, must be made to procreate regardless of their opinion on the matter? — Book273
And that pretty much captures your stance. Also nothing to do with ethics. Bravo. — Book273
This has nothing to do with the logic of how someone breaking restrictions actively becomes a danger towards others. — Christoffer
I won't take the vaccine but I would have no problem with colchicine if needed. — Book273
Or that, knowing how mammoth a global vaccine rollout is, that changing course at this stage would be impractical when the current course appears to be working okay? — Kenosha Kid
In April 2013, as part of an April Fool's Day prank, two radio personalities at Gator Country 101.9, a station in Lee County, Florida, told listeners that dihydrogen monoxide was coming out of their water taps and were suspended for a few days. The prank resulted in several calls by consumers to the local utility company, which sent out a release stating that the water was safe.
Are you gonna break the restrictions? Are you gonna go out in public? Socialize with people who are unknowing about your refusal? — Christoffer
You are comfortable rolling up your sleeve for the vaccine, good for you. — Book273
I, and many other educated individuals, are not so keen. Perhaps in five years, or ten, maybe. You do not know the long term effects of it, no one does, not even those that make it. We also don't know the long term effects of Covid. — Book273
A) Trust in my body to do what it has always done by responding appropriately to new pathogens and trust in the health of others' to do the same — Book273
B) Allow myself to be injected with something new, that has had testing time that numbers in months rather than years, to protect me from another new thing that has been known of for less than two years, which we also know not much about. — Book273
I go with option A. The second just seems too risky. The speeches attached to the vaccine are very snakeoil salesmanish. — Book273
I have done the research — Book273
You are espousing the position that I should take the vaccine, or hide away, for the health of the species. I say that I should not take the vaccine, nor hide away, for exactly the same reason; the health of the species. — Book273
I have listened to the experts explain the value and then go back and change what they said as new information arose — Book273
I see the data, not what I want to see, but what is there. — Book273
Those who are vaccinated will, according to your argument, be safe. The only people at risk will be others who have chosen not to have the vaccine. — Janus
Ok, so maybe, maybe, maybe that's a tad extreme. But really, we put up with way too much shit from such people. How about, ban them from all airlines for life? Ok, I guess I can live with that. — Foghorn
the swine flu vaccine that had serious consequences? — Christoffer
There ya go! Restrict all them anti-vaxers! They are evil bastards that won't listen to what we want! Damn all those who will not obey! ( I am out of torches, you will have to make your own for the Anti-vaxer march)If you don't get the vaccine, you have no right to the same level of freedom, — Christoffer
I don't think it's fascism to position yourself hard against reckless behavior. — Christoffer
Is there a problem here sir?
So what about anti-vaccers and those pushing ideas of breaking restrictions, if people follow that or if they follow their own ideas, shouldn't that be considered in the same manner as driving blindfold or getting someone else to do it? — Christoffer
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.