Philosophy Now Forum

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 7:56 pm
Wrong answer. Not only do speakers of Standard English not agree on this question, neither does the rest of the world that does not speak Standard English. And, in fact, the word "foetus" comes from Latin, not Standard English, and means "an offspring of a human or other mammal in the stages of prenatal development" (Oxford English Dictionary). We're not talking about "other mammals," obviously; so what we're talking about, in Standard English, is a "human."

Maybe you want to revise that answer?.....


That is true (re birth contro) But I don't know what you are trying to conclude from that fact.

One thing you can say about them: that at least they are not tearing one limb from limb and flushing her into a sink. So that's in their favour, I guess. But who says they should be preventing pregnancy with pills? Why don't they just manage their own reproductive potential by choice -- the very faculty the "pro-choicers" want us to think is so great?

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:01 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 7:56 pm
Wrong answer. Not only do speakers of Standard English not agree on this question, neither does the rest of the world that does not speak Standard English. And, in fact, the word "foetus" comes from Latin, not Standard English, and means "an offspring of a human or other mammal in the stages of prenatal development" (Oxford English Dictionary). We're not talking about "other mammals," obviously; so what we're talking about, in Standard English, is a "human."

Maybe you want to revise that answer?.....


That is true (re birth contro) But I don't know what you are trying to conclude from that fact.

One thing you can say about them: that at least they are not tearing one limb from limb and flushing her into a sink. So that's in their favour, I guess. But who says they should be preventing pregnancy with pills? Why don't they just manage their own reproductive potential by choice -- the very faculty the "pro-choicers" want us to think is so great?

You should read more carefully.

Fetuses can be potential lizards, or mice.

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:59 pm Per title. Nothing in human affairs is ever absolute. In this case, there are too many exceptions to make abortion not permissible.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:53 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:50 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:43 pm
I agree. That's what you can't see.

But I suspect I won't agree with what you think you can see.

I suspect you're correct. At least you see that.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:07 am

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:01 am
You should read more carefully.

I read exactly what you claimed...and pointed out why it wasn't true. "Speakers of standard english," as you wrote it, do not define things that way. Their speaking of Standard English has zero to do

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:18 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:07 am

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:01 am
You should read more carefully.

I read exactly what you claimed...and pointed out why it wasn't true. "Speakers of standard english," as you wrote it, do not define things that way. Their speaking of Standard English has zero to do

If you think that any English speakers could look at a fertilized ovum through a microscope (without further information) and say, That's a human", you are delusional.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:33 am
You mean, "...you are a biologist."

But the pregnant woman already knows it's a baby she's trying to prevent...not merely a couple of cells. If it would stay a couple of cells, she wouldn't even care. That's pretty obvious.

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:24 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:33 am
You mean, "...you are a biologist."

But the pregnant woman already knows it's a baby she's trying to prevent...not merely a couple of cells. If it would stay a couple of cells, she wouldn't even care. That's pretty obvious.

What a crock! The pregnant woman knows it is a fetus, not a "baby" That's why she is contemplating an abortion, not infanticide.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:31 am

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:24 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:33 am
You mean, "...you are a biologist."

But the pregnant woman already knows it's a baby she's trying to prevent...not merely a couple of cells. If it would stay a couple of cells, she wouldn't even care. That's pretty obvious.

What a crock! The pregnant woman knows it is a fetus, not a "baby" That's why she is contemplating an abortion, not infanticide.

She knows it will be a person, in every sense that word can have. And at all costs, she's ready to make sure that person never gets the "choices" or privileges or chance at a life that she's had. She does not fear two cells: she fears the existence of the person.

And you know it, too.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:09 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:59 pm Per title. Nothing in human affairs is ever absolute. In this case, there are too many exceptions to make abortion not permissible.

So...nothing is absolute? Slavery, genocide, rape, pedophilia...sometimes okay by you?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:33 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:31 am

Alexiev wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:24 am

What a crock! The pregnant woman knows it is a fetus, not a "baby" That's why she is contemplating an abortion, not infanticide.

She knows it will be a person, in every sense that word can have. And at all costs, she's ready to make sure that person never gets the "choices" or privileges or chance at a life that she's had. She does not fear two cells: she fears the existence of the person.

And you know it, too.

I suppose we could think of fetuses as little Palestinian children. Apparently killing them is just fine.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:39 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:33 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 1:31 am
She knows it will be a person, in every sense that word can have. And at all costs, she's ready to make sure that person never gets the "choices" or privileges or chance at a life that she's had. She does not fear two cells: she fears the existence of the person.

And you know it, too.

I suppose we could think of fetuses as little Palestinian children. Apparently killing them is just fine.

So you hate babies and Palestinians?

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:09 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2024 11:59 pm Per title. Nothing in human affairs is ever absolute. In this case, there are too many exceptions to make abortion not permissible.

So...nothing is absolute? Slavery, genocide, rape, pedophilia...sometimes okay by you?

None of these was ever prohibitively absolute, certainly not slavery, rape or even pedophilia...even on occasion attempted genocide.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:42 am

Dubious wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 2:35 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2024 12:09 am
So...nothing is absolute? Slavery, genocide, rape, pedophilia...sometimes okay by you?

None of these was ever prohibitively absolute, certainly not slavery, rape or even pedophilia...even on occasion attempted genocide.

Okay, then. I happen to think rape, to take one example, is objectively wrong. Maybe you can explain the circumstances under which you would regard rape as okay by you. Then we can maybe explore some of those others.