Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 |   |
Karma: 0
|
Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 01:53
beyond reasonable doubt? or to you :o)
here it is:
Life is good (compared to no life at all) - by default (nothing needs to happen to it (this/a life) before we hold it sacred/good)
This is clearly evidenced by the value we put on life per se - e.g.
1/ all people (mankind) accept brand new life (human or animal) is good by default - without ever waiting to see whether it's good or bad, they assume goodness has arrived - merely because it *is*
2/ even in the event of life becoming so bad it is unbearable by it's beholder, euthanasia laws (enforcing this good) are put in place to see it still doesn't end (despite it's problems, to end this life is Bad - and that's merely the law)
3/ everything (life) inbetween 1 & 2 are of course Good
all 3 of course refer to 'life' beyond mere biological, comatose existence
I (We, including you) exist, thus i know life, thus i know it is good
I can extend these thoughts/associations of life/goodness to all life - past/present & even potential life
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 06:39
it is if it's good - and i know it is
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 07:27
The things IN your life might be good, and you need your life to continue to enjoy the things. Life per se, however, is not good. And it certainly is not a
"benefit" to anyone or anything, because becoming alive does not improve welfare: it establishes a welfare for the first time. A benefit is something that improves welfare; establishing welfare is not an improvement of it.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 09:27
you see what you want to see
i was not using the example to illustrate "no life" - i was merely using it to dispell the presumption that:
i have not experienced = i dont know (irrespective of the subject/context)
it's that simple
the rest of your scrawl is equally misinformed
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 13:03
It is an INVALID example. It is ENTIRELY invalid. It is INVALID for two compelling reasons. Here's why it is INVALID. Pay attention.
First, you exist, so you are able to make an inference about the effect of gravity on canteloupes based on your experience of the effect of gravity on apples (never mind that you don't KNOW that canteloupes don't have some heretofore undiscovered property that makes them immune to gravity). This FACT about your observation, that it is based on your existence, is sufficient to make your statement INVALID.
Second, there is no analogy to "no existence". A canteloupe is analgous to an apple; there is no analogy to "nothingness".
Your example is INVALID.
Yep. It is all ENTIRELY your subjective experience of the things in your life, not your "life" _per se_.
Yes, you are. There is no "vessel". You are using a dead, INVALID metaphor.
NOT irrespective of its contents. You only KNOW about your metaphor because of your life's contents.
No, NOT life _per se_ - YOUR life. It is subjective.
You are wrong.
Yes, YOUR life.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 16:11
appealing to/adopting/engaging popular view doesn't invalidate it you daft shit - that's why we live in a democracy
i exclude extremists/witches/mediums/alien abductees and other crackpots/ne'r'do wells, without consideration
if any of them had a job, i would consider their views too
apealing/adopting the law (morals carved in stone) doesn't invalidate my argument - where do you get that idea from?
i already told you i dont consider crackpots - you are, however conceding that my evidence is overwhelming & hence substanciates my argument that life per se is good
basing a fact upon another fact doesn't stop it being a fact
alllllllllllll facts are based on other facts
it is *the* very essence of this argument - i.e. the foundation of moral is based upon what you *know* to be so (unlike law, ignorance is an excuse)
my evidence is the lives of billions and the close examination of any single one of them (bar alien abductees and the like)
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 20:43
life over and above biological existance is good - try taking one away and you'll find out *how* good
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
TGL
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 75 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/12 22:42
Is that view really shared universally? Among vegans and animal rights activists, you'll find a virulent strain of misanthropy and hatred for all life (including animals, but especially toward one's fellow man).
Logical fallacy of appealing to authority. Strike three. You're out.
Not every nation (and here in the US, Oregon just won a lawsuit allowing their euthanasia law to go into effect) has similar laws regarding euthanasia. What was left of the law in the Netherlands was, by most accounts, never enforced; the law there now is that euthanasia is legal.
Ipse dixit, circular reasoning. You're already out. Perhaps you should be ejectecd from the game.
Why can't you support your claim? Your reliance on logical fallacies is tedious and boring.
Popular posts by TGL
Comeuppance: PETA Vegan Outreach Di...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
Fruit Stickers-Look for the 8
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 02:59
You also demonstrated that you must exist in order to
"experience" anything, including a benefit, *prior* to doing the "experiencing". As you didn't exist prior to existing (duh), then existence is not a benefit to you, nor to anyone else.
Your experience of the things that constitute your life is good, you mean.
No, you are being totally SUBJECTIVE, as you are arguing ENTIRELY from YOUR experience.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 07:19
i once dropped an apple and it hit the ground - i dont need to drop a canteloupe to *know* it will hit the ground (*i* "have never experienced it" - in fact i've never even seen a canteloupe)
Absolutely - these lives (including contents) are bad, but the vessel of life is good - try taking it away from any one of them - or just put them in a different situation - either way, you cant conclude that life per se is bad
i am not speaking from point of view of my lifestyle, i am speaking as a beholder of life (i dont want to die) - i suggest you start looking from the same perspective
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
TGL
User
Senior Member
| Posts: 75 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 10:18
It's a logical fallacy:
http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/pop.htm
Trace your way from the above link to the list of other fallacies and see if you can figure out for yourself what your reply is.
It's a logical fallacy, Jethro. Your argument is long on bullshit and short on substance. On second though, it's entirely nil on substance.
IOW, you have no proof.
Popular posts by TGL
Comeuppance: PETA Vegan Outreach Di...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
Fruit Stickers-Look for the 8
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 14:07
Yes, we are, so please stop sliding back and forth between the two, which is what you continually do.
Existence per se, which is what you mean by "life", is not a "benefit", because it doesn't improve an entity's welfare: there WAS no entity prior to existence.
Only if you ALREADY exist. There is no "you" prior to existence.
You don't HAVE any reasoning above. All you have is the same slovenly, incoherent rambling you've been repeating ad nauseam, stupidly, for weeks.
It is NOT better than never having it: there is no rational basis of comparison.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 17:22
i was merely demonstrating that me having "never experienced it" doesn't stop me knowing (whatever 'it' is)
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 18:05
You just happened to make a context-destroying insertion of your lunacy. I wrote,
The things IN your life might be good, and you need your life to continue to enjoy the things.
You don't "need" your life in some absolute sense, idiot. You need it for a specific purpose. You only need it IF you are alive to begin with. Prior to existing, there is no "you", and so there is no need for life by a non-existent entity. And not just
"non-existant"; a NEVER-existing entity, to that point.
You will always misspell, and mangle grammar, and abuse punctuation. You are uneducated, and it shows in your thinking. You have a vain belief that you are clever enough to be a "natural" philosopher, and nothing could be further from the truth. You are not a philosopher of any kind.
It is not a rational basis of comparison. You simply cannot make such a comparison; to do so is nonsense.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/13 20:18
No, it isn't. Life per se CANNOT be a benefit, no matter how good the life is. This has been explained to you literally dozens of times, and you have never even attempted to refute it.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Muaddib
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 9 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/14 01:30
you do indeed - whether you fill it (or intend to fill it) with good or bad things - the vestle itsself is good (we cant fill it with anything if we dont have to one fill)
having this vestle called life is 'better' than not having one - i can say this, because i have one, ergo i can make these positive assertions on all life (past, present & potential)
Popular posts by Muaddib
consider your own mortality
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Deeemmmaaa
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 13 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/14 02:32
i was specifically unpicking dutch's logic (been snipped) that - i haven't experienced = i cant know
i proved without question that this is not nessessarily so
nope - you talk about what you want to talk about - i am specifically talking about the vessel of life (not it's contents) - i was specifically asked to address this by you
you cant be futher from the truth - my lifestyle wont change the truth i am saying
dying, living & not existing alllllllllllllllll pertain to this vessel of life that i am talking about - irrespective of it's content (that's why i am being objective)
Popular posts by Deeemmmaaa
Y life perse is a benefit
"Normal" people and th...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Deeemmmaaa
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 13 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/14 06:42
write what you will - you're tooooo late - it's already documented now
Popular posts by Deeemmmaaa
Y life perse is a benefit
"Normal" people and th...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Deeemmmaaa
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 13 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/14 14:36
i used a perfect example of how i can know about something i have NOT experienced
no i'm not & that's why i am refering to this vessel (irrespective of its contents)
i never said that ever! i said:
"i know life and i know it is good"
this is distinct, in that it does NOT refer to content - just life per se - thus objective view
i am projecting my knowledge of life per se (not 'my' life & certainly not it's contents)
Popular posts by Deeemmmaaa
Y life perse is a benefit
"Normal" people and th...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Mr. Foo
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 15 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:Proof: That life per se is good - 2006/08/14 17:33
No, you are talking about ITS (not "it's") contents; anyway, there isn't really any "vessel"; you are overusing a metaphor.
I am standing squarely on the truth. You ONLY have your subjective experience. You have said at least a dozen times that you "know" life _per se_ is good because you know YOUR life is good. That is, by definition, a projection of your SUBJECTIVE experience. It's flatly wrong, too: you know, or at least believe, that the THINGS in your life are good, not your "life" itself. This is SUBJECTIVE knowledge you have; that's all.
You aren't being objective; not AT ALL. You are projecting from only your SUBJECTIVE experience.
Popular posts by Mr. Foo
Fuckwit David Harrison fails again ...
Conspiracy to Commit War Crimes
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic