pre-persons

[Immanuel Can]

Thank you for the collaboration.

Likewise. Good talk.

[MikeNovack]

But in this case, the gangrene was chosen by you. You wanted to risk getting gangrene.

So from beginning to end, the problem is really...you.

Not exactly. The action chosen had a risk of gangrene. Like the choice to walk barefoot giving the slight risk of a cut at a place where some time before injury could be cleaned and an infection resulted, antibiotic resistant leading to tissue death leading to gangrene. Like the choice of getting into a car resulting in injury from a traffic accident.

PROBABILITIES That's what it comes down to. When very small we do NOT usually say the person chose the bad outcome. When very high, we might say that they did. Where do you stand on this? (a number, please). Do you say, if the risk of bad outcome per chosen action was 10% do you say the bad outcome was chosen? How about 1%? How about 0.1%? How about 0.01%? << for an example activity, skiing, it's 0.2 to 0.3% per time you go skiing >>

[Immanuel Can]

But in this case, the gangrene was chosen by you. You wanted to risk getting gangrene.

So from beginning to end, the problem is really...you.

Not exactly.

Yes, exactly. Nobody is compelling sex, or even unprotected sex, except in 1% of the cases. So it's 100% on the 99%.

[MikeNovack]

Yes, exactly. Nobody is compelling sex, or even unprotected sex, except in 1% of the cases. So it's 100% on the 99%.

Answer the question (re: risk percentage to be considered choice")

Or perhaps baldly state "I am going to treat sex (for some reason) differently than other "risky behaviors"". In THAT case, explain why.

Remember, we are only talking about the decision to consider the unwanted outcome a choice. Other people can chime in. For example, I think few of use would say "going skiing means choosing the resulting injury" (0.2% to 0.3%). Presumably we would not consider the bad result a choice of the risk percentage less than that. BUT -- if you consider that risk percentage enough to mean "choosing bad outcome" say so.

How about 0.5%? (about twice as risky as going skiing) How about 0.1% (less than half as risky as going skiing) << AFTER you answer, I will tell you what those particular risk numbers represent)

[Fairy]

Going skiing doesn’t risk taking the life of someone else.

[Immanuel Can]

Yes, exactly. Nobody is compelling sex, or even unprotected sex, except in 1% of the cases. So it's 100% on the 99%.

Answer the question (re: risk percentage to be considered choice")

One is always taking a risk when one makes a choice. And many activities entail risk. The question is, are you going to accept the consequences of that choice in a mature way, or are you going to do something nasty, illegal, or immoral to avoid those consequences? And when you do, can you escape making even worse consequences?

[Immanuel Can]

Going skiing doesn’t risk taking the life of someone else.

Quite so.

[MikeNovack]

Going skiing doesn’t risk taking the life of someone else.

Quite so.

Uh, not quite true. Most fatal ski accidents are one person skiing into a tree, etc. But there are collision with another skier accidents resulting in that person being the one killed.

But I see you are going to continue refusing to quantify a risk percent making it "by choice".

And as for abortion, illegal depends on jurisdiction and immoral on things like "by which religion". I assume you know perfectly well that there are some which prioritize the pregnant woman if a triage situation and define "woman's lie at risk" in such a way rarely an issue.

BUT -- we are at the moment supposedly discussing the "by choice" since you seem tho consider that relevant to the discussion. of abortion. For that to be sensible you need to either:
a) Give an estimate of risk percentage high enough for you to consider the person CHOSE the unwanted outcome.
b) State baldly that you consider SEX differently from other potentially risky behaviors and so your general risk level (high enough to make a bad outcome choice) does not apply.

Note that with other behaviors, when the person is taking measures to reduce the risk, like putting on a helmet before getting on the bicycle, USUALLY we interpret that as not choosing the bad outcome. WHY are you going to treat that differently than putting on a condom?

[Immanuel Can]

But I see you are going to continue refusing to quantify a risk percent making it "by choice".

The risk?

When you enter an abortion clinic and ask for an abortion, the chances of murdering a child are 100% -- or so close to that as to be indistinguishable.

[MikeNovack]

But I see you are going to continue refusing to quantify a risk percent making it "by choice".

The risk?

When you enter an abortion clinic and ask for an abortion, the chances of murdering a child are 100% -- or so close to that as to be indistinguishable.

You know damned well that is not what the question "how high does the risk factor of an activity have to be before we describe e bad outcome as a choice" is about. We are NOT (at the moment arguing about whether abortion prevents a child being born but whether the woman's CHOOSING to become pregnant is a relevant issue. Remember YOU aid that it was.

You can, of course, take that back and argue "whether pregnant by choice or not" NOT a factor, but that sword cuts two ways.

[Immanuel Can]

We are NOT (at the moment arguing about whether abortion prevents a child being born but whether the woman's CHOOSING to become pregnant is a relevant issue.

That's only because there's nothing to argue there. We know the answer to both. The woman who chooses to have sex, especially unprotected sex with a person who she considers unsuitable for becoming a parent, chooses to assume the consequences...that she may become pregnant, and may after that decide to choose to kill somebody, if she does.

[MikeNovack]

That's only because there's nothing to argue there. We know the answer to both. The woman who chooses to have sex, especially unprotected sex with a person who she considers unsuitable for becoming a parent, chooses to assume the consequences...that she may become pregnant, and may after that decide to choose to kill somebody, if she does.

So you are saying choice IS relevant.

Then you need to explain EITHER why you consider sex different from other other activities (regardless of percentage risk) OR to decide on a percentage risk of unwanted outcome that is high enough to consider the unwanted outcome a choice (any and all activities).

Which is it? If the latter, what percentage risk is enough for you to say the the bad outcome was by choice. As a starting point, would you say the risk of going skiing high enough? << that a person who chooses to go skiing chooses to be injured --- or not (that risk 0.2% to 0.3%) >>

[Immanuel Can]

That's only because there's nothing to argue there. We know the answer to both. The woman who chooses to have sex, especially unprotected sex with a person who she considers unsuitable for becoming a parent, chooses to assume the consequences...that she may become pregnant, and may after that decide to choose to kill somebody, if she does.

So you are saying choice IS relevant.

Of course. There are good choices, and there are evil choices. I'm saying, don't make the evil choices.

Then you need to explain EITHER why you consider sex different from other other activities

Surprisingly, I don't have any "need" in this regard.

But sex creates life. And life occasions particular moral responsibilities. You can't go around killing people just because you made an evil choice.

[MikeNovack]

.......because you made an evil choice.........

Here we go again, You say a CHOICE was made.

Did the person who willingly went skiing make a choice to get injured? (is 0.2% to 0.3% a high enough risk for us to say that). YES or NO?
How about an activity where the risk of bad outcome was 2% to 3%? How about 0.02% to 0.03%?

You need to define this level of risk before you can say "a woman who has chosen to have sex has chosen to get pregnant"

NOTE: Actually I think you want to treat sex differently because you believe sex (in humans) has one purpose, reproduction. You think we are like chimpanzees instead of being like bonobos.

[Immanuel Can]

.......because you made an evil choice.........

Here we go again, You say a CHOICE was made.

Did the person who willingly went skiing...

Explain how skiing issues in murder, and we'll consider your analogy.

You need...

You're hilarious.

No, I do not "need" to do anything simply because you want it...especially something premised on an inept analogy. I "need" not to bother with such things.