Philosophy Now Forum

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:09 am

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:03 amHow do you define the word 'animal'?

In context: nuthin' but meat.

So, not 'in context'?

For others, 'in context', there is more than just 'meat', obviously.

Just about every older child and adult knows that animals are far, far more than just 'meat', only.

But, if this is all you are able to see, and know, here, then so be it.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:09 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:09 am

And, if you believe, absolutely that humans are not animals, then what 'category' do 'humans' fit into, exactly?

Person.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Talk about one trying to find, and use, some words that it hopes will back up and support its already gained and absolutely held onto beliefs.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:09 am What did I steal, age?

Those things that you did, and still are, "henry quirk".

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:11 am

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:08 amWhat does someone have to do to prove, to you, that they have a so-called 'genuine interest'?

You? Nuthin', cuz you don't.

LOL
LOL
LOL

More and more 'excuses'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 12:11 am What have I stolen, age?

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 5:54 amAnd, what, exactly, do you 'owe' people?

Recognition & respect as persons (free wills with natural rights), and mebbe a little bit of compassion to flavor the gumbo.

By the way: what did I steal?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 1:09 pm

Age wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 5:54 amAnd, what, exactly, do you 'owe' people?

Recognition & respect as persons (free wills with natural rights), and mebbe a little bit of compassion to flavor the gumbo.

Do you owe the 'other animals' recognition and respect 'as animals', just like you owe 'humans' the recognition and respect 'as an animal' as well?

If no, then why not?

Also, what you are referring to here is the 'deep want' within all of you human beings to be recognized and accepted for who 'you' Truly are. Which, let 'us' not forget, 'you' human beings in the days when this is being written are, still, trying to work out and figure what 'the answer' is to 'the question', 'Who am 'I'?' exactly.

Obviously 'you' cannot recognized, respect, and accept who one is, exactly, when 'you' still are not yet know 'the answer' to, 'Who 'I' am, exactly'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 1:09 pm By the way: what did I steal?

Can you still not remember?

Also, do you remember you kept wanting me to provide where you said, what I said you did, and I did that?

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 2:16 am

Do you owe the 'other animals' recognition and respect

I owe them nuthin'.

If no, then why not?

The tasty pork chops I had the other night didn't come from a person, that's why.

Soylent Green is people! doesn't mean it's cow or lamb or deer or goose. It's people...persons...like me, like, I guess, you.

what you are referring to here is the 'deep want' within all of you human beings to be recognized and accepted for who 'you' Truly are.

No.

Can you still not remember?

What I remember is not on the table; what you know is.

Please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

do you remember you kept wanting me to provide where you said, what I said you did, and I did that?

No, age. For five years you bugged me about toothpicks. For five years I asked for a citation. For five years you declined to provide one. Here, in this thread, I provided the citation. You didn't do diddly-squat.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 1:13 pm

Age wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 2:16 am

Do you owe the 'other animals' recognition and respect

I owe them nuthin'.

If no, then why not?

The tasty pork chops I had the other night didn't come from a person, that's why.

And, NO 'meat' comes from a 'person'.

Meat only comes from animal bodies, obviously, like the 'human body' for example.

And, what "henry quirk" finds and calls 'tasty' has absolutely no bearing on absolutely any thing at all here.

Obviously, and irrefutably, if you grew up eating human meant, and you liked that as well, then you would also say things like, 'The tasty human chops'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 1:13 pm Soylent Green is people! doesn't mean it's cow or lamb or deer or goose. It's people...persons...like me, like, I guess, you.

you have an absolutely very different view of and definition of the word 'person'. But, then again, you also believe, absolutely, that God, Itself, is 'a person' also.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 1:13 pm

what you are referring to here is the 'deep want' within all of you human beings to be recognized and accepted for who 'you' Truly are.

No.

And, I could 'now' say, 'Yes'. But the absolute immaturity of doing so would also be as obvious.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 1:13 pm

Can you still not remember?

What I remember is not on the table; what you know is.

Please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

do you remember you kept wanting me to provide where you said, what I said you did, and I did that?

No, age.

Have you, really, 'forgotten'?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 1:13 pm For five years you bugged me about toothpicks. For five years I asked for a citation. For five years you declined to provide one. Here, in this thread, I provided the citation. You didn't do diddly-squat.

LOL Everyone here can align 'the words' I presented 'verbatim' with what you said and wrote here.

That you cannot get out of what you have said and wrote what you did here is one thing, but trying to pretend that I have not presented them is another thing.

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

-----

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:21 am

you cannot get out of what you have said and wrote

Wouldn't dream of it. I stand by every every clumsily constructed sentence.

trying to pretend that I have not presented them

You didn't, not once, in five friggin' years.

What you did is misremember, misquote, and misinterpret.

I ponied up the goods. Me not you.

-----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:06 am Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

-----

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:21 am

you cannot get out of what you have said and wrote

Wouldn't dream of it. I stand by every every clumsily constructed sentence.

So, do you still want to maintain that everyone has a 'natural right' to life, liberty, and property but you can still shoot every one of them with "your" weapons, and thus take away their 'natural right' life, liberty, and property?

If no, then why not?

But, if yes, then okay. At least you do and will stand by your clumsily, or not so clumsily, written sentence. And, if 'it' is a clumsily written sentence, then why do you not change 'it' after all of this time?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:06 am

trying to pretend that I have not presented them

You didn't, not once, in five friggin' years.

LOL
LOL
LOL

This one is so absolutely deluded, or is trying to pretend to be deluded so as to just try to persuade and fool others that I have not. Which is, by definition, deceiving in the most absolute form.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:06 am What you did is misremember, misquote, and misinterpret.

LOL I copied and pasted your very own words "henry quirk". So, how could I have, possibly, misremembered, misquoted, and misinterpreted?

Obviously, you said 'it', when you wrote 'it' here, and now you say you stand by 'it'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:06 am I ponied up the goods. Me not you.

you, supposedly, so-called 'ponied up' what 'goods', exactly?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:06 am -----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

Are you, still, 'seriously' trying to pretend that you cannot remember here?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 4:13 am

So, do you still want to maintain...

...a person has an absolute claim on, an inalienable right to, his, and no one's else's, life, liberty, and property?

Yes, I do.

but you can still shoot every one of them with "your" weapons, and thus take away their 'natural right' life, liberty, and property?

When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property. In that recognizing and respecting one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other. And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

if 'it' is a clumsily written sentence, then why do you not change 'it' after all of this time?

I'm lazy.

I copied and pasted your very own words

You did not. I did.

you, supposedly, so-called 'ponied up' what 'goods', exactly?

Read this thread.

-----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 4:13 am

So, do you still want to maintain...

...a person has an absolute claim on, an inalienable right to, his, and no one's else's, life, liberty, and property?

Yes, I do.

but you can still shoot every one of them with "your" weapons, and thus take away their 'natural right' life, liberty, and property?

When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property.

you either did not finish your sentence here, or, you are saying and claiming that you can still shoot human beings, and thus take away their natural right to life, liberty, and/or property 'when a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property.

Now, I do not think you mean the latter, which if you do not, then you have not finished your sentence here.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm In that recognizing and respecting one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other.

But, you will, still, shoot at human beings, and thus will, still, take away another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, correct?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

LOL "aggressor" and 'self-defense'

your attempts at trying to 'justify' your obviously Wrong doing is ceaseless.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

if 'it' is a clumsily written sentence, then why do you not change 'it' after all of this time?

I'm lazy.

Among other things.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

I copied and pasted your very own words

You did not. I did.

If this is what you want to believe is true, then I certainly will not try to stop you.

What I have already written and provided here, proves what is absolutely True, and Correct.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

you, supposedly, so-called 'ponied up' what 'goods', exactly?

Read this thread.

Once again, another one who likes to 'make claims', but then does not back up and support 'those claims'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm -----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

A lot of things.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:05 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 4:13 am

So, do you still want to maintain...

...a person has an absolute claim on, an inalienable right to, his, and no one's else's, life, liberty, and property?

Yes, I do.

but you can still shoot every one of them with "your" weapons, and thus take away their 'natural right' life, liberty, and property?

When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property.

you either did not finish your sentence here, or, you are saying and claiming that you can still shoot human beings, and thus take away their natural right to life, liberty, and/or property 'when a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property.

Now, I do not think you mean the latter, which if you do not, then you have not finished your sentence here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm In that recognizing and respecting one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other.

But, you will, still, shoot at human beings, and thus will, still, take away another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, correct?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

LOL "aggressor" and 'self-defense'

your attempts at trying to 'justify' your obviously Wrong doing is ceaseless.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm

if 'it' is a clumsily written sentence, then why do you not change 'it' after all of this time?

I'm lazy.

Among other things.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm

I copied and pasted your very own words

You did not. I did.

If this is what you want to believe is true, then I certainly will not try to stop you.

What I have already written and provided here, proves what is absolutely True, and Correct.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm

you, supposedly, so-called 'ponied up' what 'goods', exactly?

Read this thread.

Once again, another one who likes to 'make claims', but then does not back up and support 'those claims'.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 1:28 pm -----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

A lot of things.

Somehow you've got me saying things that I would guess hq is saying.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:05 pm

you....did not finish your sentence here

My mistake. Here you go...

When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other. And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

you will, still, shoot at human beings, and thus will, still, take away another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, correct?

I will defend my life, liberty, and property, and the lives, liberties, and properties of others (even you), yes. And that could very mean shooting those aggressors. However, I'm not one to butt in where I'm not wanted. If you'd rather I didn't lend an assist if you're being murdered or slaved or raped or stolen from or defrauded, just say so and I'll walk away in the unlikely event I come across you being waylaid. What say you? You want my help or not?

"aggressor" and 'self-defense'

You can use offender instead of aggressor if that makes it easier to grasp.

What I have already written and provided here, proves what is absolutely True, and Correct.

Nope, you're wrong about everything.

A lot of things.

Name one.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:19 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:05 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm



...a person has an absolute claim on, an inalienable right to, his, and no one's else's, life, liberty, and property?

Yes, I do.



When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property.

you either did not finish your sentence here, or, you are saying and claiming that you can still shoot human beings, and thus take away their natural right to life, liberty, and/or property 'when a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property.

Now, I do not think you mean the latter, which if you do not, then you have not finished your sentence here.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm In that recognizing and respecting one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other.

But, you will, still, shoot at human beings, and thus will, still, take away another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, correct?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

LOL "aggressor" and 'self-defense'

your attempts at trying to 'justify' your obviously Wrong doing is ceaseless.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

I'm lazy.

Among other things.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

You did not. I did.

If this is what you want to believe is true, then I certainly will not try to stop you.

What I have already written and provided here, proves what is absolutely True, and Correct.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm

Read this thread.

Once again, another one who likes to 'make claims', but then does not back up and support 'those claims'.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 2:46 pm -----

Again: please, just answer the actual clarifying question I ask you, and do it openly and honestly...

What have I stolen?

A lot of things.

Somehow you've got me saying things that I would guess hq is saying.

Thank you for pointing out my obviously Wrong doing here.

Corrected now.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:05 pm

you....did not finish your sentence here

My mistake. Here you go...

When a person recognizes and respects another's absolute claim, his natural right, to his own life, liberty, and property one is disinclined to murder, rape, enslave, steal from, and defraud the other. And where one is not disinclined, where he decides to treat the other as commodity, he may find the other exercising his right to self-defense (which may include shooting the aggressor).

So, when you shoot other human beings is this because you were so-called 'not disinclined' to, had decided to treat the other as a commodity, and/or did not recognize and respect the other's absolute claim, that is; their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, or, for some other reason?

If it was for some other reason or reasons, then what is that reason or reasons, exactly?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm

you will, still, shoot at human beings, and thus will, still, take away another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, correct?

I will defend my life, liberty, and property, and the lives, liberties, and properties of others (even you), yes.

And, when you say and use the word 'property' you also include 'toothpicks' and even 'moldy pieces of bread right'?

If yes, then you will not recognize and will disrespect another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own property, liberty, and even to their own life, correct?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm And that could very mean shooting those aggressors. However, I'm not one to butt in where I'm not wanted. If you'd rather I didn't lend an assist if you're being murdered or slaved or raped or stolen from or defrauded, just say so and I'll walk away in the unlikely event I come across you being waylaid. What say you? You want my help or not?

Why would you call and label an actual 'human being' as an "aggressor" for just walking away with a toothpick or a moldy piece of bread?

Also, were you not even yet aware that if you just looked at and saw 'the other' as a 'human being', just like 'you' are, instead of and looking at, seeing 'them', and label that 'human being' as "an aggressor", then you would be far less likely to shoot that 'human being', and would be far more likely to actually recognize and respect their, obviously, absolute claim and natural right to their own life?

But, if you want to just shoot at 'human beings', then by all means do what you want. After all you are absolutely free to do whatever you like.

And, if you want to look at, put on, and see individual 'human beings', "themselves", with names and labels like "murderer", "slaver", "rapist", "thief", "fraudster", "aggressor", "offender", or absolutely anything else, which would then make you feel somehow 'justified' in taking the life, liberty, and/or property of another 'human being', who had previously had an absolute claim, and natural right, to their own life, liberty, and property, then by all means you are absolutely free to do this as well. But, just remember, you have only 'justified' 'your Wrong behavior' to you, and maybe a few select others who 'look at', 'see', and 'label' 'human beings' 'the way' that you do.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm

"aggressor" and 'self-defense'

You can use offender instead of aggressor if that makes it easier to grasp.

Once more, you keep completely and utterly missing the whole point here.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm

What I have already written and provided here, proves what is absolutely True, and Correct.

Nope, you're wrong about everything.

So, all 'I' have to also say now is, 'Nope, 'you' are wrong about every thing', and this is all that is needed here, right?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2024 3:42 pm

A lot of things.

Name one.

Have you really forgotten all of them?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2024 3:27 amSo, when you shoot other human beings

I never said one way or another if I had shot someone. It's not the kind of thing one admits to in a public forum (and that was not a veiled admission).

If I shoot someone it's becuz I'm self or other defending.

And, when you say and use the word 'property' you also include 'toothpicks' and even 'moldy pieces of bread right'?

Yes. Think you got me, but you didn't, as you'll see (or not).

you will not recognize and will disrespect another's absolute claim, their natural right, to their own property, liberty, and even to their own life, correct?

Oh, I always recognize the personhood and natural rights of others. I also recognize if my personhood or natural rights are in jeopardy I can defend them.

Why would you call and label an actual 'human being' as an "aggressor" for just walking away with a toothpick or a moldy piece of bread?

Probably not. It's a toothpick. It's a moldy bread. They're mine, yes, but I value both very little. But, you know a lot of this is context-driven. If that toothpick is the only thing on hand to press the little button inside the door knob of the door keeping me from gettin' to my kid who is dying, and you walk away with it, I'll definitely shoot you to get it back. And if that moldy bread, properly processed, is the only cure for what's killin' my kid, and you walk away with it, I'll definitely shoot you to get it back.

if you just looked at and saw 'the other' as a 'human being', just like 'you' are, instead of and looking at, seeing 'them', and label that 'human being' as "an aggressor", then you would be far less likely to shoot that 'human being', andt would be far more likely to actually recognize and respect their, obviously, absolute claim and natural right to their own life?

And if the guy who tries to steal my life, liberty, or property just looked at and saw me as a person just like he is, instead of seeing me as commodity, then he would be far less likely to get shot.

Have you really forgotten all of them?

Yeah, my memory is sketchy....help a brother out...tell me: what have I stolen?