PC Principal III: Anti-Affection League: Subtitling Intensifies: The Movie, The Thread

[Zealot]

I didn't forget the LSAT, I just learned all the other stuff they taught me after I took it.

There are levels of offenses, there are established societal tiers of what is and is not acceptable, there are different levels of punishment for variations of the same crime, exigent circumstances exist.

Is parental consent a universal standard? No.

Is okaying your child appearing in a questionable ad the same as selling them into slavery? Also no.

[Gredival]

I didn't forget the LSAT, I just learned all the other stuff they taught me after I took it.

They taught you shit in law school besides how to use Lexis/WestLaw?

Is okaying your child appearing in a questionable ad the same as selling them into slavery? Also no.

Which was never the point of contention. The point of contention is that parental consent is not a universally applicable justification.

[Zealot]

Oh, well then carry on.

[Buffy]

Ding ding ding.

Truth is universal. One demonstration of falsity in just one instance eliminates a premise from being universally applicable.

It just bears keeping in mind that there can be multiple failures from multiple premises.



No this is literally Philosophy 101. The generation of hypotheticals which either force us to admit that there is something wrong with a principle, or that there is something wrong with our intuition.

This is the exact reason why the trolley problem is significant. You either commit to being a utilitarian by saying it's okay to kill the one person to save five, or you admit that something is wrong with utilitarianism.

All I got out of this was that Spock subscribed to utilitarianism.

[Zealot]

[Xno Kappa]

What’s a tier below Godwin’s Law?

[Xno Kappa]

Like, replace Hitler and nazis with sex trafficking. What’s that called?

[Niiro]

An odd choice to be sure, but not a fallacious argument.

[Niiro]

Ya know, actually not that odd.

"Say the black kid was posing wearing a sweater with a swastika and some Nazi slogans and the parents said it was ok."

is actually a more subtle argument than jumping right to sex slavery.

[BaneTheBrawler]

Like, replace Hitler and nazis with sex trafficking. What’s that called?

eastern europe

[Niiro]

Ok, new idea:

How much money would it take for you to allow your black child to advertise Nazi paraphernalia?

[Fiye]

Ok, new idea:

How much money would it take for you to allow your jewish child to advertise Nazi paraphernalia?

ftfy

[Zealot]

eastern europe

Got 'em

[NynJa]

Strawman is now a philosophical argument now?!?!?!?

[Gredival]

A "strawman" is an attempt to set up a flawed substitute of an argument to knock down instead of the actual argument.

Hypotheticals are an abstract analysis of underlying principles by testing whether or not they remain satisfactory absent certain conditions. When you tweak certain conditions and get different results, that tells you something.

In a hypothetical it's not that I prove the wrongness of the example that proves you wrong, it's the fact in and of itself that the principle is not universally applicable.

For example, people who have an issue with the trolley problem rarely have an issue with the "military junta" problem. That's the hypothetical where you a guest in a South American country controlled by a military junta and the dictator takes you to witness an execution of twenty rebels. He tells you that, as an example of his mercy, he will allow 19 to live if you execute one of them yourself. There are variations on this hypothetical where all twenty beg you to kill any one of them, where the dictator asks and gets a volunteer, etc. that are all designed to induce someone to reluctantly agree that it is okay to kill the one.

If you can get someone who objects to the trolley problem to kill someone in the junta problem, you have proven that in at least some cases it's okay to prioritize the number of lives saved. Identifying what changes makes someone switch allows us to probe our instinctual sense of ethics. It lets you identify exactly when and why utilitarianism fails. And that's useful for constructing a world view that can appropriately determine when to utilize util.

[archibaldcrane]

That's a lot of wasted words on literally the dumbest member of these forums.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Zetanio]

That's a lot of wasted words on literally the dumbest member of these forums.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Don't put yourself down like that.

[Cail]

[archibaldcrane]

Don't put yourself down like that.

oh no

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Gredival]

That's a lot of wasted words on literally the dumbest member of these forums.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

macross.