3 ms·
The only conclusion to your argument is that there is no such thing as nature or a natural course, that anything and everything is entirely subject to the actio
by smeej 4y ago
The only conclusion to your argument is that there is no such thing as nature or a natural course, that anything and everything is entirely subject to the actions of the people involved. This simply isn't so, and betrays a complete and total lack of contact with anything biological, natural, or even just physical.
The whole conversation is about taking action to end someone's life, and whether anyone who does not take action to assist someone in ending their life is forcing them to continue living. "Being alive" has a biological meaning and a natural course. These aren't just things we get to define as we will.
While I admire the gymnastics you're putting your mind through to try to maintain shortening someone's life intentionally could even remotely be considered "the natural course" such that force would have to be applied to prevent it, the only way to get there is to negate meaning in any word or any thing other than what any particular person ascribes to it.
Virtually by definition, no one can join you in your solipsism, so I'm afraid this conversation has run its course.