3 ms·

My objection may stem from religious beliefs, but that isn't to say it isn't arguable from non-religious standpoints. People use a hill of solid reasoning with

My objection may stem from religious beliefs, but that isn't to say it isn't arguable from non-religious standpoints. People use a hill of solid reasoning with a kernel of faith at very the bottom (kind of like the L4 microkernel family), whether that faith is in religion or something else. At the end of the day, everyone's argument will always come down to "I just think that's how the world works best."

mikeash 13y ago
And that is why I said "at least in this case." Your position may be arguable without religion, but you're not doing that.
- sdegutis 13y ago
  I am arguing for it without appealing to religion, but my replies are kind of scattered and drowned out by requests for them. This whole thread is really hard to navigate. Shouldn't have started it out the way I did. Lesson learned.
  - mikeash 13y ago
    No, you're stating your opinion without appealing to religion, but you haven't argued for it at all. Basically, you stepped into a community that heavily leans atheist and rationalist, stated an opinion based on religion that the community disagrees with, and said that this makes you feel like an outsider. All I can say is, duh. And if you aren't interested in actually defending that opinion, what is the point? As far as I can tell, you were just looking for a little hit of persecution and martyrdom.
    - sdegutis 13y ago
      "No, you're stating your opinion without appealing to religion, but you haven't argued for it at all." I'm stating my perspective and trying to back it up by my reasoning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097627 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097627 But maybe all I'm doing is stating my opinion and that I just don't know the difference.
      - mikeash 13y ago
        You're just telling us what you feel. You're not giving us any reasons why we might agree with you.
        sdegutis 13y ago
        I thought I was. Which means there's a disconnect somewhere, either in your brain or mine. I won't venture to guess which, considering it could be in mine, rendering my reasoning invalid. (Assuming that makes sense.)
        humanrebar 13y ago
        His case, concisely stated is: 1. All births are good things. 2. Contraception causes fewer births. 3. Therefore contraception is not good. ...of course, correct me if I'm wrong. It's a philosophical argument, not an empirical one, so it might be a little alien compared to the typical discussion thread on HN and similar venues.
        sdegutis 13y ago
        I don't think philosophical arguments are very alien to HN. They're usually just applied to different problems, like what the best programming paradigm is, or how security should best be implemented in the kernel, or what's the best attitude to found your start-up on, etc.
        mikeash 13y ago
        3 so obviously follows from 1 that anyone who thinks contraception is a good thing clearly does not believe 1. It's so direct that it doesn't really qualify as an argument, but merely a restatement of the original position. It's like saying that spheres are good, and when asked why, saying that they're three-dimensional and round, and three-dimensional round things are good. Is that an argument? I don't really think so. An argument is where you state your reasoning in such a way that it could, at least potentially, convince the other person. Merely stating one of your opinions that happens to be related to another of your opinions doesn't qualify. Personally, for #1, I don't think there's anything good or bad about a birth. More or fewer births, by themselves, don't matter. They take on good or bad qualities based on the context in which they happen. Preventing a birth before anything related even happens is not by itself good or bad, it's just something that happens. I'd wager most of the others on the "pro-contraception" side think likewise.

mikeash 13y ago

And that is why I said "at least in this case." Your position may be arguable without religion, but you're not doing that.

sdegutis 13y ago
I am arguing for it without appealing to religion, but my replies are kind of scattered and drowned out by requests for them. This whole thread is really hard to navigate. Shouldn't have started it out the way I did. Lesson learned.
- mikeash 13y ago
  No, you're stating your opinion without appealing to religion, but you haven't argued for it at all. Basically, you stepped into a community that heavily leans atheist and rationalist, stated an opinion based on religion that the community disagrees with, and said that this makes you feel like an outsider. All I can say is, duh. And if you aren't interested in actually defending that opinion, what is the point? As far as I can tell, you were just looking for a little hit of persecution and martyrdom.
  - sdegutis 13y ago
    "No, you're stating your opinion without appealing to religion, but you haven't argued for it at all." I'm stating my perspective and trying to back it up by my reasoning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097722 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097670 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097627 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7097627 But maybe all I'm doing is stating my opinion and that I just don't know the difference.
    - mikeash 13y ago
      You're just telling us what you feel. You're not giving us any reasons why we might agree with you.
      - sdegutis 13y ago
        I thought I was. Which means there's a disconnect somewhere, either in your brain or mine. I won't venture to guess which, considering it could be in mine, rendering my reasoning invalid. (Assuming that makes sense.)
      - humanrebar 13y ago
        His case, concisely stated is: 1. All births are good things. 2. Contraception causes fewer births. 3. Therefore contraception is not good. ...of course, correct me if I'm wrong. It's a philosophical argument, not an empirical one, so it might be a little alien compared to the typical discussion thread on HN and similar venues.
        sdegutis 13y ago
        I don't think philosophical arguments are very alien to HN. They're usually just applied to different problems, like what the best programming paradigm is, or how security should best be implemented in the kernel, or what's the best attitude to found your start-up on, etc.
        mikeash 13y ago
        3 so obviously follows from 1 that anyone who thinks contraception is a good thing clearly does not believe 1. It's so direct that it doesn't really qualify as an argument, but merely a restatement of the original position. It's like saying that spheres are good, and when asked why, saying that they're three-dimensional and round, and three-dimensional round things are good. Is that an argument? I don't really think so. An argument is where you state your reasoning in such a way that it could, at least potentially, convince the other person. Merely stating one of your opinions that happens to be related to another of your opinions doesn't qualify. Personally, for #1, I don't think there's anything good or bad about a birth. More or fewer births, by themselves, don't matter. They take on good or bad qualities based on the context in which they happen. Preventing a birth before anything related even happens is not by itself good or bad, it's just something that happens. I'd wager most of the others on the "pro-contraception" side think likewise.