4 ms·

> I don't know man, if you think it's fine for parents to abort downs babies, I think that means you're the utilitarian. > You can try deny it, but in your hea

> I don't know man, if you think it's fine for parents to abort downs babies, I think that means you're the utilitarian. > You can try deny it, but in your heart of hearts you think it's fine to value avoiding the inconvenience of a downs baby higher than the value of a fetus's life. > That's pretty damn utilitarian. Thank you for conceding that utilitarianism trivially entails arrogating unto oneself the right to decide universally who lives and who dies, in quite literally every imaginable case - this being obviously true to so reflexive and unreflected-upon an extent that you can only conceive of even an overtly hostile and disdainful interlocutor arguing he should instead be given that power, rather than that no one should. Is there anything you'd care to add to that, or are you content with having revealed your vicious ideology in all its bare-fanged, blood-soaked glory?

klipt 1y ago
> be given that power, rather than that no one should So you believe that red states which disallow aborting downs babies are more moral than blue states that allow aborting downs babies? Since the red states are the only ones that try to ensure that "no one has that power" (to abort downs babies)
- throwanem 1y ago
  Would you like at any point to argue claims of your own, rather than inventing ones to falsely attribute to me? Not that you'll disembarrass yourself at this point, but one would hope to see you show the sense at least to stop digging.
  - klipt 1y ago
    You're not making any coherent points. You vaguely refer to aborting downs fetuses as evil and "full of bloodshed" but then you're unwilling to support laws that would prevent that. Do you actually believe in anything except misunderstanding what utilitarian means?
    - throwanem 1y ago
      I'm not going to answer arguments you make up and assign me as though they were my own. Do people usually tolerate that in your experience?
      - klipt 1y ago
        Look in the mirror pal. You've been nothing but rude and assuming this whole thread
        throwanem 1y ago
        Well, I haven't been willing to take you at your word when you showed up to tell me how wrong I am based on nothing but your say-so. Sure, I'll give you that. Were you not expecting to have to convince anyone? If that really is so, then again I have to ask, do you imagine this sort of thing normal? Are you in the habit of letting harangue stand in for conversation in ordinary life also, or is this a special occasion?
        klipt 1y ago
        Okay, tell me what your moral framework is, and I'll tell you how it's just a variant of utilitarianism.
        throwanem 1y ago
        For the sake of this argument, let's assume my moral framework is identical with that of a priest of Tezcatlipoca, at the height of the Aztec Empire. Astonish me.
        JohnKemeny 1y ago
        What began as a complaint about HN’s interest in Scott Alexander devolved into a prolonged, hostile, and circular argument about whether certain reproductive choices are a form of eugenics, whether that’s compatible with utilitarianism, and whether utilitarianism itself is morally bankrupt. Neither side persuades the other, and the thread becomes more about rhetorical sparring than the original topic.

klipt 1y ago

> be given that power, rather than that no one should So you believe that red states which disallow aborting downs babies are more moral than blue states that allow aborting downs babies? Since the red states are the only ones that try to ensure that "no one has that power" (to abort downs babies)

throwanem 1y ago
Would you like at any point to argue claims of your own, rather than inventing ones to falsely attribute to me? Not that you'll disembarrass yourself at this point, but one would hope to see you show the sense at least to stop digging.
- klipt 1y ago
  You're not making any coherent points. You vaguely refer to aborting downs fetuses as evil and "full of bloodshed" but then you're unwilling to support laws that would prevent that. Do you actually believe in anything except misunderstanding what utilitarian means?
  - throwanem 1y ago
    I'm not going to answer arguments you make up and assign me as though they were my own. Do people usually tolerate that in your experience?
    - klipt 1y ago
      Look in the mirror pal. You've been nothing but rude and assuming this whole thread
      - throwanem 1y ago
        Well, I haven't been willing to take you at your word when you showed up to tell me how wrong I am based on nothing but your say-so. Sure, I'll give you that. Were you not expecting to have to convince anyone? If that really is so, then again I have to ask, do you imagine this sort of thing normal? Are you in the habit of letting harangue stand in for conversation in ordinary life also, or is this a special occasion?
        klipt 1y ago
        Okay, tell me what your moral framework is, and I'll tell you how it's just a variant of utilitarianism.
        throwanem 1y ago
        For the sake of this argument, let's assume my moral framework is identical with that of a priest of Tezcatlipoca, at the height of the Aztec Empire. Astonish me.
        JohnKemeny 1y ago
        What began as a complaint about HN’s interest in Scott Alexander devolved into a prolonged, hostile, and circular argument about whether certain reproductive choices are a form of eugenics, whether that’s compatible with utilitarianism, and whether utilitarianism itself is morally bankrupt. Neither side persuades the other, and the thread becomes more about rhetorical sparring than the original topic.