Philosophy Now Forum

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:04 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:03 pm Well, well, well,it seems like it's your opinion mouthing off here now.

Lala la la la...I'm not listening to your silly mouthpiece. hahaha!

My opinion is informed. Yours isn't.

I've made an actual choice (having experienced both cultures, lived both lives and examined the arguments on both sides). You haven't.

Slight difference

I know what you mean, but I guess if I'm ever in a country where I'm being forced to make my own informed choice, then I guess I'm screwed either way.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:12 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:04 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:03 pm Well, well, well,it seems like it's your opinion mouthing off here now.

Lala la la la...I'm not listening to your silly mouthpiece. hahaha!

My opinion is informed. Yours isn't.

I've made an actual choice (having experienced both cultures, lived both lives and examined the arguments on both sides). You haven't.

Slight difference

I know what you mean, but I guess if I'm ever in a country where I'm being forced to make my own informed choice, then I guess I'm screwed either way.

You say it so proudly.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 12:46 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 12:38 pm We've made the choice, and any changes to the law on private gun ownership are only likely to become more restrictive. We don't need to own guns, and I don't think most of us want to own them.

To use a cliche from the Americans... it's not the Bill of needs - it's the bill of rights.

You don't need to own television sets either. But there you are NOT outlawing them.

But people want to own TV sets, and their ownership does not present any danger to others, either percieved or actual.

I don't have any of those in my house. All of my weapons are defensive.

No, any weapon, by definition, is offensive. Something like a bullet proof vest would be an example os something defensive.

You don't want to live in a safer less crime-ridden country like Switzerland? OK...

I don't know much about Switzerland, and nothing at all about what it's like to live there, so I can't really say if I would like to live somewhere like Switzerland.

I mean that your position is ideological. Even though Switzerland is much safer than the UK despite having more gun violence you don't care about safety.

Are the Swiss allowed to own guns, and is Switzerland safer than the UK? I don't know the answer to either of those questions, but if you say so.....

Perhaps Switzerland would be even safer without the guns, who knows?

You just dislike guns.

How many things that you don't like, don't want, and don't need do you own?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 12:54 pm

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 12:46 pm
You just don't like guns. That's fine, but like I said... Those are real strong opinions you hold for an ignoramus.

It's not an opinion in my opinion.

It's a fact, that I do not personally like guns.

And I do not need your opinion on my opinion to meet with your approval as to whether or not my opinion is of ignorance, I will make up my own mind about what I feel about guns, and personally I am not ignorant of the fact that is my own self grown opinion..

Well said.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm But people want to own TV sets, and their ownership does not present any danger to others, either percieved or actual.

People want to own guns too. But they aren't allowed.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm No, any weapon, by definition, is offensive. Something like a bullet proof vest would be an example os something defensive.

I reject your definitions.

If I am using my gun to defend myself then it's a defensive weapon.
If I am using my gun to attack you then it's an offensive weapon.

If I am using the ceramic plates in my bullet proof vest to attack you and bash your skull in - it's an offensive weapon.

if I am using a pencil to attack you and stab you in the eye - it's an offensive weapon.

Or maybe go with how the tacticool crowd says it: I am the weapon - the gun is just a tool.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm Are the Swiss allowed to own guns, and is Switzerland safer than the UK? I don't know the answer to either of those questions, but if you say so.....

Yes and Yes.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm Perhaps Switzerland would be even safer without the guns, who knows?

It's questionable whether Switzerland would even exist if they didn't have any guns.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm How many things that you don't like, don't want, and don't need do you own?

None, but there's plenty things that I didn't like and didn't think I want or need that I now own.

Guns being one of them - I changed my mind. A rare skill these days.

That's right, judge; the man leaned over my fence and attempted to pick a rose from my garden, so I shot him in the head, under my entitlement to defend my property. It was a purely defensive act, as I'm sure even the would be thief would have to acknowledge, were he able to.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:29 pm That's right, judge; the man leaned over my fence and attempted to pick a rose from my garden, so I shot him in the head, under my entitlement to defend my property. It was a purely defensive act, as I'm sure even the would be thief would have to acknowledge, were he able to.

Your law permits using physical force and inflicting harm on a person to defend property?!?

What an ass-backwards country! And I live in Africa!

Maybe you want to read that sentence again: If I am using my gun to defend myself then it's a defensive weapon. Not defending my property. Defending myself.

You understand the difference between self and property, yes? It's called self-defence not property-defence for a reason!

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:23 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:15 pm But people want to own TV sets, and their ownership does not present any danger to others, either percieved or actual.

People want to own guns too. But they aren't allowed.

Well we can't always have what we want, can we? We might want a fully armed and manned tank standing on our front lawn, just in case our neighbour across the road has his music on too loud, and we need to neutralise his property, in order to defend ourselves against noise polution. I know it sucks, but there are good reasons for our not being allowed to do that.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:23 pm

Harbal wrote: No, any weapon, by definition, is offensive. Something like a bullet proof vest would be an example os something defensive.

I reject your definitions.

I reject your rejection.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:23 pm

Harbal wrote: Are the Swiss allowed to own guns, and is Switzerland safer than the UK? I don't know the answer to either of those questions, but if you say so.....

Yes and Yes.

Okay, and okay.

It's questionable whether Switzerland would even exist if they didn't have any guns.

Especially if you were answering the question.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:23 pm

Harbal wrote: How many things that you don't like, don't want, and don't need do you own?

None, but there's plenty things that I didn't like and didn't think I want or need that I now own.

Guns being one of them - I changed my mind. A rare skill these days.

So you only own a gun because you changed your mind? And you say you didn't want one before you changed your mind.

Well I haven't changed my mind, so I don't want a gun, just like you say you didn't want one before you changed your mind.

I don't know what happened to make you change your mind, so I don't know if I would change my mind if the same thing happened to me.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:31 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 1:29 pm That's right, judge; the man leaned over my fence and attempted to pick a rose from my garden, so I shot him in the head, under my entitlement to defend my property. It was a purely defensive act, as I'm sure even the would be thief would have to acknowledge, were he able to.

Your law permits using physical force and inflicting harm on a person to defend property?!?

What an ass-backwards country! And I live in Africa!

Maybe you want to read that sentence again: If I am using my gun to defend myself then it's a defensive weapon. Not defending my property. Defending myself.

You understand the difference between self and property, yes? It's called self-defence not property-defence for a reason!

Stop splitting hairs.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:02 pm Well we can't always have what we want, can we? We might want a fully armed and manned tank standing on our front lawn, just in case our neighbour across the road has his music on too loud, and we need to neutralise his property, in order to defend ourselves against noise polution. I know it sucks, but there are good reasons for our not being allowed to do that.

I agree. But we aren't talking about noise polution management with tanks.

We are talking about life-defence with guns.

But I can see why you'd want to go for absurdities to justify your biases.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:02 pm I reject your rejection.

So you don't mind being assaulted with my defensive bulletproof vest; or a pencil?

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:02 pm So you only own a gun because you changed your mind? And you say you didn't want one before you changed your mind.

Well I haven't changed my mind, so I don't want a gun, just like you say you didn't want one before you changed your mind.

I don't know what happened to make you change your mind, so I don't know if I would change my mind if the same thing happened to me.

What happened is I decided to think for myself and question what I've been told about guns.

It's true - neither of us knows what would happen if you try it.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:06 pm Stop splitting hairs.

Stop strawmanning everything I say.

There's this principle - maybe you've heard of it...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:08 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:02 pm Well we can't always have what we want, can we? We might want a fully armed and manned tank standing on our front lawn, just in case our neighbour across the road has his music on too loud, and we need to neutralise his property, in order to defend ourselves against noise polution. I know it sucks, but there are good reasons for our not being allowed to do that.

I agree. But we aren't talking about noise polution management with tanks.

We are talking about life-defence with guns.

But I can see why you'd want to go for absurdities to justify your biases.

I don't feel any need to justify my biases; the absurdities are purely for my own entertainment. They help me to endure the tedium of this discussion.

So you don't mind being assaulted with my defensive bulletproof vest; or a pencil?

I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't shoot you because of it.

What happened is I decided to think for myself and question what I've been told.

I, too, decided to think for myself, and question what I'm being told by you.

It's true - neither of us knows what would happen if you try it.

And we probably never will. I am not likely to try something that doesn't appeal to me; especially when I can envisage its leading to unwanted consequences if I did try it.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:23 pm I don't feel any need to justify my biases; the absurdities are purely for my own entertainment. They help me to endure the tedium of this discussion.

It's hard to imagine your being honest in "enduring the tedium".

Having let me "have the last word" yesterday you seem to have chosen the tedium all by yourself.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:23 pm I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't shoot you because of it.

I guess we are different like that. My dislike for enduring grievous bodily harm outweighs my dislike for administering it.

Harbal wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:23 pm And we probably never will. I am not likely to try something that doesn't appeal to me; especially when I can envisage its leading to unwanted consequences if I did try it.

Well yeah... If you view changing your mind as an "unwanted consequence" - that's essentially what I meant by you being prejudiced against your prejudices being challenged.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 11:06 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 11:03 am Very good response thanks.

I'm just trying to point out that we are even worse off than the animals who cannot use 'high tech' weapons against themselves, like we can.

So what's the point in thinking and believing we are better off and safe in the world? So whether we have weapons or not, it's not going to make the slighest bit of difference to our life, we are still going to die no matter how much we think we are safer defending it with our weapons.

When will we stop pretending that dying at birth; dying at 35 from a tooth sepsis and dying at 90 in your sleep are the same thing?

Yes, different in details, but philosophically the same, no?

commonsense wrote: ↑Fri May 12, 2023 2:33 pm Yes, different in details, but philosophically the same, no?

If that's true then it seems like a very good reason to junk phillosophy. The destination's the same - the journey isn't.

It reminds me of this fallacy...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McNamara_fallacy