4 ms·

No need for decephalization! Babies up to the age of one year have not yet formed minds. And, the leftovers after research and harvesting are a most delicious n

No need for decephalization! Babies up to the age of one year have not yet formed minds. And, the leftovers after research and harvesting are a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout. Seriously, I believe the essential problem is that we don't want to get used to treating beings who look, seem and feel human, as non-human. We want to, and are, moving in the opposite direction. Man's inhumanity to man is worse than cancer.

echelon 6y ago
A human without a brain is not a person. An animal with high cognitive function is a person. > Man's inhumanity to man is worse than cancer. A brainless human has no rights, no feelings, and never existed as a conscious entity. It's a tool. The inability to accept this as a remarkable solution is beyond disappointing.
- hyperpallium2 6y ago
  You didn't consider the actual argument: > we don't want to get used to treating beings who look, seem and feel human, as non-human. Doing so might enable you to counter it. Or at least, understand where others are coming from. Let me parallel your claims: > A baby is a human without a mind - therefore not a person. A baby is an animal without high cognitive function. A mindless human has no rights, no feelings, and never existed as a conscious entity. It's a tool. Babies fail the self-awareness mirror test (until about 15-24 months). Do you feel comfortable doing this to other people's infants? How about your own first born?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
syrgian 6y ago
This reminds me of when a French coworker tried to translate an item in a restaurant menu which said 'cabrit al forn', Catalan for 'roasted goat'. Google first translated it to English ('baked kid') and then to French 'enfant cuit au four'. His incredulous face was on point. I just checked and it still happens today, it probably happens with many other indirect translations with ambiguous intermediate words.

echelon 6y ago

A human without a brain is not a person. An animal with high cognitive function is a person. > Man's inhumanity to man is worse than cancer. A brainless human has no rights, no feelings, and never existed as a conscious entity. It's a tool. The inability to accept this as a remarkable solution is beyond disappointing.

hyperpallium2 6y ago
You didn't consider the actual argument: > we don't want to get used to treating beings who look, seem and feel human, as non-human. Doing so might enable you to counter it. Or at least, understand where others are coming from. Let me parallel your claims: > A baby is a human without a mind - therefore not a person. A baby is an animal without high cognitive function. A mindless human has no rights, no feelings, and never existed as a conscious entity. It's a tool. Babies fail the self-awareness mirror test (until about 15-24 months). Do you feel comfortable doing this to other people's infants? How about your own first born?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

syrgian 6y ago

This reminds me of when a French coworker tried to translate an item in a restaurant menu which said 'cabrit al forn', Catalan for 'roasted goat'. Google first translated it to English ('baked kid') and then to French 'enfant cuit au four'. His incredulous face was on point. I just checked and it still happens today, it probably happens with many other indirect translations with ambiguous intermediate words.