4 ms·
Unless you think consequentialism is immoral. If you believe that it is never acceptable to participate in suicide in any way, you absolutely should not want th
by nsxwolf 2y ago
Unless you think consequentialism is immoral. If you believe that it is never acceptable to participate in suicide in any way, you absolutely should not want this.
- david-gpu 2y agoYou do not have to participate in assisted suicide if you don't want to. That doesn't mean you're are entitled to stop others.
- nsxwolf 2y agoOk, but OP told me what I should want, and I am refuting that.
- _90ew 2y ago.
- Henchman21 2y agoAnd what of the entitlement of society keeping people alive to live out this dystopian nightmare we’ve created for ourselves? At what point does human dignity factor in to all this? Because all I see are people trying to escape a nightmare and others trying to prevent it. To what end? To what degree must I participate in this hell?
- david-gpu 2y agoI hope that if your life ever becomes unbearable you will have the option available to you to end it with dignity at your own convenience. Or perhaps you would prefer the opposite?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- grayhatter 2y ago> If you believe that it is never acceptable to participate in suicide in any way, you absolutely should not want this. This is interesting, if you have a reason to believe this that's not some flavor of "my religion told me to", I'd love to hear your justification for why it's never acceptable?
- Flimm 2y agoAll moral reasoning can be boiled down to "my religion told me to", assuming a comprehensive enough definition of religion. For example, an atheist humanist may argue that certain actions are immoral because they are harmful to human beings. The implicit religion behind that reasoning is that harm (and certain types of harm) is immoral. That's a religious statement, one that cannot be proved with the scientific method. It's a statement of moral axioms, and not all people share the exact same moral axioms.
- grayhatter 2y agolol, what?! 1) I exist and can suffer 2) I perceive others as real, other people may or may not exist but it's useful and safer to assume they do exist. 3) They appear to experience joy, and suffering the same way that I do 4) I want to avoid suffering, and they say they want to avoid suffering. 5) My actions can contribute to their suffering 6) Given we both exist, there's no external reason to preference one of us over the other, they also likely have the same internal value as I do 7) I can prevent them from suffering, the sum of the system is improved if I behave in a way to cause the least amount of suffering. Where's the religion in that?
- nsxwolf 2y agoI would say the judgement that suffering is bad and that preventing suffering is worthwhile, which requires “worthwhile” to have any real meaning at all would be the religious part. These are completely unscientific and unprovable assertions.
- 2y ago