The Couch

Of Murder?

Comments on Of Murder?

Monk2400
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2005

Total Topics: 116
Total Comments: 1518
#26 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/06/11 - 9:16 PM:

Speaking of cold-blooded murder, has anyone seen the fabulous Hitchcock film Rope? Awesome bit of filmaking, but also relevant to the morals of murder. In the story our protagonists live out the Nietzschian dream of being super-men, beyond the level of the morals of the common man, and murder a friend just for the sake of it.

8)
KinNaoko90
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 21, 2008
Location: Fulton County, NY

Total Topics: 36
Total Comments: 298
#27 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/06/11 - 9:50 PM:

Z: Atheism is defined at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism
Most of these definitions explain it as a belief that there is no god. Atheist is not a set belief system but rather a term to describe people who believe god does not exist. Therefore it encompasses many belief systems. So, no, it is not a belief system in itself.

I'm not trying to get you to believe in god. I'm not sure if that's what you thought. I don't necessarily believe in him either.

I don't believe time is needed for all things either. I wasn't sure which theories you believed in and used an example that I thought might apply. I am sorry that it didn't, though.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#28 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/06/11 - 9:54 PM:

Monk2400 wrote:


This is the common mantra of the pro-death camp. It is flawed to the core. A fetus is a new individual, with a unique body and DNA and consciousness. It is not a growth like a tumor that one can validly consider a continuity of the mother's body. Quite simply, it is NOT her body. And deciding to terminate it is a decision to terminate a unique lifeform, which is nothing like cutting out a tumor, cutting off an arm, or getting liposuction, all of which the mother has the right to do to herself.

In the case where carrying and delivering a fetus will cause death to the mother, then the choice becomes valid. But it is still not a determination of what to do with one's own body. In that case it is a decision to kill another lifeform to save one's own life, which is justifiable.

IMHO, any other reason is not justifiable.

My $0.02.

8)




True. And killing one man is genocide because all of his sperm ought to be considered actual people. And since 50% of those sperm will develop into men, they will produce additional men.

So in reality, by killing one man, you are killing an entire race of individuals.

But wait, since even sperm ought to be considered valid human beings, every time you masturbate it is total genocide!

Hitler, Stalin and Genghis Kahn could never hope to accomplish the cruelty of a 13 year old boy that just discovered Meghan Fox.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#29 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/06/11 - 9:59 PM:

KinNaoko90 wrote:
Z: Atheism is defined at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism
Most of these definitions explain it as a belief that there is no god. Atheist is not a set belief system but rather a term to describe people who believe god does not exist. Therefore it encompasses many belief systems. So, no, it is not a belief system in itself.

I'm not trying to get you to believe in god. I'm not sure if that's what you thought. I don't necessarily believe in him either.

I don't believe time is needed for all things either. I wasn't sure which theories you believed in and used an example that I thought might apply. I am sorry that it didn't, though.


I guess I'm not an atheist then. Whatever I am, I do not believe in God.

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make, but I, like you, am at least somewhat skeptical of all phenomena I have experienced.

However, my feelings are that if I'm stuck in the Matrix, a dream or whatever I'm stuck here and I might as well play along to the rules.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#30 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/06/11 - 10:08 PM:

Monk2400 wrote:
Speaking of cold-blooded murder, has anyone seen the fabulous Hitchcock film Rope? Awesome bit of filmaking, but also relevant to the morals of murder. In the story our protagonists live out the Nietzschian dream of being super-men, beyond the level of the morals of the common man, and murder a friend just for the sake of it.

8)


This movie sounds awesome. I'll have to d/l it or buy it or something.
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#31 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 12:46 AM:

Monk2400 wrote:


This is the common mantra of the pro-death camp. It is flawed to the core. A fetus is a new individual, with a unique body and DNA and consciousness. It is not a growth like a tumor that one can validly consider a continuity of the mother's body. Quite simply, it is NOT her body. And deciding to terminate it is a decision to terminate a unique lifeform, which is nothing like cutting out a tumor, cutting off an arm, or getting liposuction, all of which the mother has the right to do to herself.

In the case where carrying and delivering a fetus will cause death to the mother, then the choice becomes valid. But it is still not a determination of what to do with one's own body. In that case it is a decision to kill another lifeform to save one's own life, which is justifiable.

IMHO, any other reason is not justifiable.

My $0.02.

8)




Your $0.02! Hahahaha laughinglaughing
Thinker13
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 27, 2009

Total Topics: 357
Total Comments: 3379
#32 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 12:55 AM:

Zenoplata wrote:


True. And killing one man is genocide because all of his sperm ought to be considered actual people. And since 50% of those sperm will develop into men, they will produce additional men.

So in reality, by killing one man, you are killing an entire race of individuals.

But wait, since even sperm ought to be considered valid human beings, every time you masturbate it is total genocide!

Hitler, Stalin and Genghis Kahn could never hope to accomplish the cruelty of a 13 year old boy that just discovered Meghan Fox.


Very well put Zenoplata. winklaughing

Truly speaking, as Monk2400 has put so often, it takes enlightenment of a Buddha ( or wisdom of highest degree) [ Whether enlightenment of highest degree exists or not, whether there are fully illuminated Buddhas or not, is in itself, a moot point!] to decide about who should live or not live. It is again Axiology and a lot of it. laughing Again: Apart from sperms, there are, so many microrganisms coming into existence and going out of existence, by some phenomenon, in which we have some role to play; directly or indirectly. So it indeed takes a very high degree of discrimination to decide best possible course to live your life. You are all, in this very thread, addressing to some of the nuances of the same. My sincere appreciation for the same. takes a bow
smokinpristiformis
child of the stars
Avatar

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2005
Location: Belgium

Total Topics: 74
Total Comments: 1247
#33 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 8:36 AM:

www.youtube.com/results?sea...age=&utm_source=opensearch
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#34 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 10:14 AM:

"Either people have a right to their own life or they don't."

I have a 'right' to my life (to live) as long as I can successfully assert and defend that 'right'.

If I can: well, lookee here!, Quirk lives another day!

If I can't: bury me deep.

The universe is amoral. Your 'right' to anything is a matter of opinion only.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#35 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 12:04 PM:

henry quirk wrote:
"Either people have a right to their own life or they don't."

I have a 'right' to my life (to live) as long as I can successfully assert and defend that 'right'.

If I can: well, lookee here!, Quirk lives another day!

If I can't: bury me deep.

The universe is amoral. Your 'right' to anything is a matter of opinion only.


100% agree.

smokinpristiformis
child of the stars
Avatar

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2005
Location: Belgium

Total Topics: 74
Total Comments: 1247
#36 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 12:15 PM:

The universe is amoral. Your 'right' to anything is a matter of opinion only.


One can only hope that humanity soon progresses beyond the stage where it measures itself by what is evident and starts measuring itself by what is possible.
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#37 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 1:01 PM:

"One can only hope that humanity...starts measuring itself by what is possible."

"Humanity" can measure itself as it likes: changes nothing.

Again: we -- you, me, him, her -- live in an amoral universe. A 'right' to anything -- your 'right', my 'right', his 'right', her 'right' -- is a matter of opinion only.

If all involved agree that each human individual has the 'right' to him- or her-self, then -- great! -- no problem.

But if even one disagrees: tough shit...prepare for war.

The world operates (as it always has, and -- I suspect -- always will) within the context of tangible, bloody, disagreement.

Work for the day when 'all' measure by what is possible rather than by what 'is'...good luck to you.

A grand waste of time, in my opinion, but, it is YOUR time (energy, resources, 'self') to waste so: have at it.
Monk2400
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2005

Total Topics: 116
Total Comments: 1518
#38 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 2:08 PM:

Zenoplata wrote:

But wait, since even sperm ought to be considered valid human beings, every time you masturbate it is total genocide!


I don't see how it follows that sperm is an independent conscious being. Sperm does not spontaneously grow into a human being. It is only 50% of the equation, and a thus a building block of the new person, just like the egg. Not equivalent.

8)
Monk2400
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2005

Total Topics: 116
Total Comments: 1518
#39 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 2:13 PM:

Thinker13 wrote:

Truly speaking, as Monk2400 has put so often, it takes enlightenment of a Buddha ( or wisdom of highest degree) [ Whether enlightenment of highest degree exists or not, whether there are fully illuminated Buddhas or not, is in itself, a moot point!] to decide about who should live or not live. It is again Axiology and a lot of it. laughing Again: Apart from sperms, there are, so many microrganisms coming into existence and going out of existence, by some phenomenon, in which we have some role to play; directly or indirectly. So it indeed takes a very high degree of discrimination to decide best possible course to live your life. You are all, in this very thread, addressing to some of the nuances of the same. My sincere appreciation for the same. takes a bow


True enough, we kill things with each breath we take. Every breath you taaake, every micro-org you termin-ate [sung to Sting] :p

I've often read, though, in Buddhist contexts, that the human being is considered one of the highest forms of life to incarnate, because it is relatively rare in the universe and thus karmically 'valuable'. Hence, we ought to be more careful concerning how we dispose of our kind, not the least because they are our kind, and reflections of ourselves.

8)
Monk2400
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2005

Total Topics: 116
Total Comments: 1518
#40 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 2:16 PM:

henry quirk wrote:

The universe is amoral. Your 'right' to anything is a matter of opinion only.


I agree about the universe. But our rights are not just opinion, but the basis of social agreement, and hence, the building block of a well-defined social structure. They thus have the force of social law (if not moral law).

But it takes people to be engaged and involved with this agreement. If not, then off ye go. But one can't complain of harm done by others when one lives in the jungle, because after all, the universe is amoral.

grin
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#41 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 3:02 PM:

Monk2400 wrote:


I don't see how it follows that sperm is an independent conscious being. Sperm does not spontaneously grow into a human being. It is only 50% of the equation, and a thus a building block of the new person, just like the egg. Not equivalent.

8)


But an undeveloped fetus is not an independent conscious being either.

How about instead of abortions mothers to be just took the independent conscious beings out of their stomachs and allowed them to spontaneously grow into human beings on their own.
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#42 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/07/11 - 3:58 PM:

"They thus have the force of social law (if not moral law)"

An opinion backed with the big(ger) stick is still opinion...it just happens to be the one that gets enforced.

Opinion is opinion is opinion...back it with whatever 'might' you like, dress it up as you like, but it's still opinion.

#

"it takes people to be engaged and involved with this agreement"

Yeah, I already said that.

#

"one can't complain of harm done by others when one lives in the jungle, because after all, the universe is amoral."

Agreed: that's why I don't (complain, that is). Instead: I do useful things like self-defend and get revenge... whatever
smokinpristiformis
child of the stars
Avatar

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2005
Location: Belgium

Total Topics: 74
Total Comments: 1247
#43 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/08/11 - 2:21 AM:

I do useful things like self-defend and get revenge...


That's only useful if you assume that others are not just like you. And not of equal value. There is no rationale to support that stance, except perhaps solipsism, which is absurd.

Whatever the results of following the logic of your philosophy, henry, increased utility is not one of them.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#44 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/08/11 - 8:27 AM:

smokinpristiformis wrote:


That's only useful if you assume that others are not just like you. And not of equal value. There is no rationale to support that stance, except perhaps solipsism, which is absurd.

Whatever the results of following the logic of your philosophy, henry, increased utility is not one of them.


Men are not created equal. Some are bigger, some smaller, some consume more resources than others, some are smarter, some possess a greater will to survive.

How do we judge value?
Monk2400
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2005

Total Topics: 116
Total Comments: 1518
#45 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/08/11 - 8:00 PM:

Zenoplata wrote:

But an undeveloped fetus is not an independent conscious being either.


By the same logic killing neo-nates should be acceptable because they are not 'independent'. Moreover, a fetus has its own heartbeat and its own systems. So far as I know, no one knows anything about fetal consciousness. So you can't say that a fetus is not independently conscious. In fact, if it weren't then it follows that the mother should share consciousness with the fetus, which she obviously does not.

The fact is that the being is not part of the mothers body no matter what nonsense rational we want to spew out. It has its own unique DNA. How much more different can you get than that? A mother is a host. A baby is not a possession of a mother nor an extension of herself. But believe what you will.


Zenoplata wrote:

How about instead of abortions mothers to be just took the independent conscious beings out of their stomachs and allowed them to spontaneously grow into human beings on their own.


If the technology existed for such a procedure to be done, that would be an excellent alternative. But I fear the developing humans in vats would only be used as food for our Reptilian overlords. So some safeguards would have to be put in place for that.

8)
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#46 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/08/11 - 9:13 PM:

Killing anything is acceptable if deemed so by society.

Are you saying sperm do not possess unique DNA? I'm not much of a biologist, but I would guess that they have at least some unique characteristics.

Personally, I don't really care where anyone draws the line of what is considered an independent being or not.

I do not believe human beings are special little snowflakes with magical souls inside of them. If we have to kill some babies for the benefit of society so be it, nature kills few for the benefit of many every second.

Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't personally kill my child, but what someone else does is none of my concern so long as it doesn't effect me.

Like Quirk said, the universe is amoral.
smokinpristiformis
child of the stars
Avatar

Usergroup: Moderators
Joined: Apr 20, 2005
Location: Belgium

Total Topics: 74
Total Comments: 1247
#47 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/09/11 - 3:37 AM:

Zenoplata wrote:


Men are not created equal. Some are bigger, some smaller, some consume more resources than others, some are smarter, some possess a greater will to survive.

How do we judge value?



We don't. Since differences between adult humans are immensely small and there is no practical method to define value, the only rational stance is to assume that all people are equal.
libertygrl
Administrator
Avatar

Usergroup: Administrators
Joined: Apr 16, 2005
Location: San Francisco

Total Topics: 425
Total Comments: 4673
#48 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/09/11 - 4:55 AM:

everyone starts with certain basic rights granted by the society they're born into, presumably the same for everyone. those rights can change though, for example when one commits a crime and winds up in prison. so not all humans are treated with equal value, even in an ideal system. inevitably we're placed in positions where the value of one person overwrites or supercedes that of another. it's impossible for everyone to have equal rights and opportunities 100% of the time.

regarding abortion, i personally don't think i could have one.
henry quirk
Senior Member
Avatar

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Location: here

Total Topics: 47
Total Comments: 1298
#49 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/09/11 - 9:43 AM:

"That's only useful if you assume that others are not just like you."

No.

I assume that every one else wants exactly what I do, that is: to live and to exercise self-possession.

I self-defend against what I know others are capable of, and, revenge myself when others are successful doing what I know they are capable of.

#

"And not of equal value."

There's only a handful on the rock who are of equal value to me (that is: worth as much, or more, to me as I am to myself)...the rest: not worth a cup of warm spit (even though I may 'like' some immensely).

#

"There is no rationale to support that stance, except perhaps solipsism, which is absurd."

The only 'rationale' I need to live as I do is the nature of the world itself, as I perceive it.

'I' exists as adversary to and in the world (the world resists me). 'WE', of course, does not, living (or attempting to live) in harmony with 'all'.

I prefer to be 'I'...you prefer to be part of 'WE'.

As usual: WAR!

#

"Whatever the results of following the logic of your philosophy, henry, increased utility is not one of them."

Not a philosophy: just living.

And: I'm not a utilitarian... whatever

##

"the only rational stance is to assume that all people are equal"

It maybe 'rational': but, it's not realistic.

'Rationality' is great and fine: in its proper place (that is: as one function of the organic, on-going, idiosyncratic, individual). To raise rationality up to the status of 'ideal' (little god) is dumb.
Zenoplata
Senior Member

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 08, 2011

Total Topics: 2
Total Comments: 176
#50 - Quote - Permalink
Posted 03/09/11 - 11:31 AM:

smokinpristiformis wrote:



We don't. Since differences between adult humans are immensely small and there is no practical method to define value, the only rational stance is to assume that all people are equal.


I don't think they're immensely small or differences in wage, health and scores on standardized tests would be immensely small.

Why is it rational to assume men are equal when I can visibly see they are different? If anything that is irrational.
Search thread for
Download thread as
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5



Sorry, you don't have permission . Log in, or register if you haven't yet.



Acknowledgements:

Couch logo design by Midnight_Monk. The photo hanging above the couch was taken by Paul.

Powered by WSN Forum. Free smileys here.
Special thanks to Maria Cristina, Jesse , Echolist Directory, The Star Online,
Hosting Free Webs, and dmoz.org for referring visitors to this site!

Copyright notice:

Except where noted otherwise, copyright belongs to respective authors
for artwork, photography and text posted in this forum.