Gunman shooting at abortion clinic in the US - multiple victims

[SoulMonster]

No, the only thing you have been consistent about is misunderstanding.

But why do these special abilities grant us special rights? That's probably a good question. Why does we hold things dear that is awesome and remarkable to us? Why do we find a sunset precious? Why do we think that human's ability to reason is more valuable than, say, a bat's ability to echolocalize and therefore it should have special rights? I would say because our abilties surpass anything else found in the biosphere, and is the guarantee for enjoying life -- something we don't think any other species is able to do.

I don't care whether you don't think 'sacred' is scientific enough for me. In this context it is only meant as something that is very, very, very valuable, to the extent of approaching religious holiness. There is no supernatural component to it.

You're not answering the question, you're dithering. Explain to me the value of human life, this value that makes it sacred and dictates that it is not expendable in any way. It's the same question again and again, alls I'm asking is that you explain yourself.

The value stems from our unique abilities, and these abilities have been listed numerous times. You want me to put a number on the value?

There is no dictation here, to ME, this value is so high that human lifes are sacred. I am not dictating to you that you should value these abilities equally high.

There is no "ugly shit" logically stemming from these few statements:

- The value of a human life stems for our individual amazing abilities, and not from what they mean to the collective human species.

- We are all part of an unbroken chain of life originating (presumably) from one instance of life coming to be.

There are when you put the latter comment in it's original context of being stated in a discussion regarding abortion and, more specifically, to explain why the birth of a child is not the beginning of life but rather part of an ever evolving and morphing overall lifeform, there are implications to that and conclusions that can be reached from there that are kinda ugly.

Yes, there are obvious implications to this when I discuss with someone who refuses to accept that something was a DIGRESSION despite it EXPLICTLY being stated so, yet continues to nag about it for hours like some high parrot

[Len Cnut]

The value stems from our unique abilities, and these abilities have been listed numerous times. You want me to put a number on the value?

So we all unique abilities that make us sacred...but a great many of us are still superfluous and inessential at the same time?

There is no dictation here, to ME, this value is so high that human lifes are sacred. I am not dictating to you that you should value these abilities equally high.

I think you owe the bronze age an apology, honestly, call yourself a man of science?!? You're a disgrace to your petri dish young man!

[SoulMonster]

I have EXPLICITLY stated that not every individual is necesarry for the species' survival. In that sense, not every instance of human life is essential, either, for the species' survival.

Each and every one is valuable because each and everyone has very valuable abilities. We all have something that is remarkable and fantastic and amazing and awesome, not because of what it does to our species, but what it can do alone -- like be self-aware, think, feel compassion, do good things, feel love -- and these things have an INTRINSIC value. At least, that is my humble opinion.

How can you be valuable and sacred in each individual instance but inessential at the same time?

Because the value has nothing to do with species' survival, whereas the essentiality you refer to is all about that.

It's like asking, "How can a painting have a value when there are thousands of them?". Do I again have to type out that human value is intrinsic and not dependent upon its effect on the collective? Obviously I did.

[Len Cnut]

Yes, there are obvious implications to this when I discuss with someone who refuses to accept that something was a DIGRESSION despite it EXPLICTLY being stated so, yet continues to nag about it for hours like some high parrot

Well i don't think it was a digression, i think it tied in very pertinently with the matter at hand, I am not responsible for your inability to see your own ideas through.

[SoulMonster]

The value stems from our unique abilities, and these abilities have been listed numerous times. You want me to put a number on the value?

So we all unique abilities that make us sacred...but a great many of us are still superfluous and inessential at the same time?

FOR OUR SPECIES'S SURVIVAL we are individually superfluous and inessential, right. Just like a painting has a value that is also not connected to whether it is a unique representation of an art form. It has a value because it has an intrinsic value. Just like humans.

Honest question, are you very high?

There is no dictation here, to ME, this value is so high that human lifes are sacred. I am not dictating to you that you should value these abilities equally high.

I think you owe the bronze age an apology, honestly, call yourself a man of science?!? You're a disgrace to your petri dish young man!

What's the bronze age got to do with anything?

Have I ever called myself a man of science and has anything I have written here in any way been in dispute with science?

Yes, there are obvious implications to this when I discuss with someone who refuses to accept that something was a DIGRESSION despite it EXPLICTLY being stated so, yet continues to nag about it for hours like some high parrot

Well i don't think it was a digression, i think it tied in very pertinently with the matter at hand, I am not responsible for your inability to see your own ideas through.

Thank you for training me not to ever discuss anything with you again since you openly refuse to accept my intentions and explanations. That will surely be a time-saver.

[Len Cnut]

Because the value has nothing to do with species' survival, whereas the essentiality you refer to is all about that.

So it's a relatively lesser form of value? But still sacred?

It's like asking, "How can a painting have a value when there are thousands of them?". Do I again have to type out that human value is intrinsic and not dependent upon its effect on the collective? Obviously I did.

The answer is that it doesn't if there are thousands of them unless it's the original, transplant that notion back to humanity and you're back to the idea of some being of a lesser value than others.

[SoulMonster]

Because the value has nothing to do with species' survival, whereas the essentiality you refer to is all about that.

So it's a relatively lesser form of value? But still sacred?

Yep.

It's like asking, "How can a painting have a value when there are thousands of them?". Do I again have to type out that human value is intrinsic and not dependent upon its effect on the collective? Obviously I did.

The answer is that it doesn't if there are thousands of them unless it's the original, transplant that notion back to humanity and you're back to the idea of some being of a lesser value than others.

Well, that is your idea. To ne, all humans have these abilities, and hence we are all valuable, and -- as I have stated before, but chances are you didn't read it, or didn't get it, or have forgotten it -- this value is high enough for us all to be sacred despite these abilities being unequally measured out.

[Len Cnut]

FOR OUR SPECIES'S SURVIVAL we are individually superfluous and inessential, right. Just like a painting has a value that is also not connected to whether it is a unique representation of an art form. It has a value because it has an intrinsic value. Just like humans.

Honest question, are you very high?

I'm never high between the hours of 9 and 6 on weekdays and all day Saturdays too This is all bringing us right back to your theory and it's inherent implications regarding the lack of value in human life.

What's the bronze age got to do with anything?

Have I ever called myself a man of science and has anything I have written here in any way been in dispute with science?

All that sacred stuff, honestly!

Thank you for training me not to ever discuss anything with you again since you openly refuse to accept my intentions and explanations. That will surely be a time-saver.

No, i will not accept your explanation if it doesn't make any sense. You were saying you digressed, i.e. went off topic so that bit wasn't relevant to the overall topic, I found a way to tie it in so then it wasn't quite as digressive as you state. You don't like being wrong do you? I don't suppose any of us much do.

Yep.

Then it makes no sense as is basically contradictory.

Well, that is your idea. To ne, all humans have these abilities, and hence we are all valuable, and -- as I have stated before, but chances are you didn't read it, or didn't get it, or have forgotten it -- this value is high enough for us all to be sacred despite these abilities being unequally measured out.

There you go with that sacred shit again I think you been too long in India y'know Valuable and sacred one and all and yet a great many are expendable, got'cha. And it's not just my idea, it's a fact, a thousand repros of a painting are not of the same value as the original, in fact they can even not be as valuable or of the same value as each other.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Len B'stard

[SoulMonster]

FOR OUR SPECIES'S SURVIVAL we are individually superfluous and inessential, right. Just like a painting has a value that is also not connected to whether it is a unique representation of an art form. It has a value because it has an intrinsic value. Just like humans.

Honest question, are you very high?

I'm never high between the hours of 9 and 6 on weekdays and all day Saturdays too This is all bringing us right back to your theory and it's inherent implications regarding the lack of value in human life.

There are no such implications, neither have you been able to demonstrate any. And again, it is not a "theory".

I am usually more than interested in spending time explaining my views, with all kinds of persons, but it truly is a waste of time with a person who think I am lying, disregards what I say, fails to grasp the simplest of concepts, and makes me repeat myself over and over again, in an effort to prove some point in aprejudiced view where I lack some moral sense or something. In this thread you have implied that I am a liar and that I mis think humans are expandable or lacking in worth. I see no fertile grounds for an honest exchange of ideas. It is frankly insulting and a huge waste of time.

If you want to learn something about the various grounds and foundation for human rights and value, pick up philosophy books on the subject, it is well discussed and theories and opinions florish. If you want to learn about the unbroken chain of life that connects us all, pick up elementary school text books on cell biology and evolutionary theory. If you want to fathom the simple concept of intrinsic value, well, just smarten up.

I am out of here.

[Len Cnut]

There are no such implications, neither have you been able to demonstrate any. And again, it is not a "theory".

Yes there are and I've explained them umpteen times and you have been entirely incapable of responding to them with any substance precisely because you are wrong.

I am usually more than interested in spending time explaining my views, with all kinds of persons, but it truly is a waste of time with a person who think I am lying, disregards what I say, fails to grasp the simplest of concepts, and makes me repeat myself over and over again, in an effort to prove some point in aprejudiced view where I lack some moral sense or something. In this thread you have implied that I am a liar and that I mis think humans are expandable or lacking in worth. I see no fertile grounds for an honest exchange of ideas. It is frankly insulting and a huge waste of time.

This is a pattern with you, when you've got nowhere left to go with an argument and you can't possibly be right whatever way up you hold it, when you've frustrated yourself trying to dream up new rationalisations and rewordings and when there are no more trifles or side orders for you to zero in on and purposely ignore the obvious pertinent point then you just respond by calling the person stupid.

The problem with you is you think it's like a fight or something, where one person wins and the other loses and the winner proves he has a bigger willy, i didn't say you were a liar i said you were wrong, there's a difference. The reason you repeat yourself over and over is because when you hit a wall in an argument you just go 'right, fuck, i've hit a wall here, what do i do? I know, i'll just keep repeating the same shit at the person as if they're stupid and not grasping something!'...doesn't really work with adults though I'm afraid.

I didn't say you said or thought humans were expendable or lacking in worth i said an idea that you had espoused had strong implications towards that, again, there's a difference.

If you want to learn something about the various grounds and foundation for human rights and value, pick up philosophy books on the subject, it is well discussed and theories and opinions florish. If you want to learn about the unbroken chain of life that connects us all, pick up elementary school text books on cell biology and evolutionary theory. If you want to fathom the simple concept of intrinsic value, well, just smarten up.

Oh i strive to be worthy of your towering intellect Soulie Mr Science Man throws his toys out of the pram and won't play with me cuz he doesn't like being proved wrong, awwww

Edited December 2, 2015 by Len B'stard

[DieselDaisy]

Poor Len's been caught up in a Soul argument I see.

We've all been there!

[classicrawker]

There are no such implications, neither have you been able to demonstrate any. And again, it is not a "theory".

Yes there are and I've explained them umpteen times and you have been entirely incapable of responding to them with any substance precisely because you are wrong.

I am usually more than interested in spending time explaining my views, with all kinds of persons, but it truly is a waste of time with a person who think I am lying, disregards what I say, fails to grasp the simplest of concepts, and makes me repeat myself over and over again, in an effort to prove some point in aprejudiced view where I lack some moral sense or something. In this thread you have implied that I am a liar and that I mis think humans are expandable or lacking in worth. I see no fertile grounds for an honest exchange of ideas. It is frankly insulting and a huge waste of time.

This is a pattern with you, when you've got nowhere left to go with an argument and you can't possibly be right whatever way up you hold it, when you've frustrated yourself trying to dream up new rationalisations and rewordings and when there are no more trifles or side orders for you to zero in on and purposely ignore the obvious pertinent point then you just respond by calling the person stupid.

The problem with you is you think it's like a fight or something, where one person wins and the other loses and the winner proves he has a bigger willy, i didn't say you were a liar i said you were wrong, there's a difference. The reason you repeat yourself over and over is because when you hit a wall in an argument you just go 'right, fuck, i've hit a wall here, what do i do? I know, i'll just keep repeating the same shit at the person as if they're stupid and not grasping something!'...doesn't really work with adults though I'm afraid.

I didn't say you said or thought humans were expendable or lacking in worth i said an idea that you had espoused had strong implications towards that, again, there's a difference.

If you want to learn something about the various grounds and foundation for human rights and value, pick up philosophy books on the subject, it is well discussed and theories and opinions florish. If you want to learn about the unbroken chain of life that connects us all, pick up elementary school text books on cell biology and evolutionary theory. If you want to fathom the simple concept of intrinsic value, well, just smarten up.

Oh i strive to be worthy of your towering intellect Soulie Mr Science Man throws his toys out of the pram and won't play with me cuz he doesn't like being proved wrong, awwww

Except you have not proven him wrong..............

Edited December 2, 2015 by classicrawker

[Len Cnut]

There are no such implications, neither have you been able to demonstrate any. And again, it is not a "theory".

Yes there are and I've explained them umpteen times and you have been entirely incapable of responding to them with any substance precisely because you are wrong.

I am usually more than interested in spending time explaining my views, with all kinds of persons, but it truly is a waste of time with a person who think I am lying, disregards what I say, fails to grasp the simplest of concepts, and makes me repeat myself over and over again, in an effort to prove some point in aprejudiced view where I lack some moral sense or something. In this thread you have implied that I am a liar and that I mis think humans are expandable or lacking in worth. I see no fertile grounds for an honest exchange of ideas. It is frankly insulting and a huge waste of time.

This is a pattern with you, when you've got nowhere left to go with an argument and you can't possibly be right whatever way up you hold it, when you've frustrated yourself trying to dream up new rationalisations and rewordings and when there are no more trifles or side orders for you to zero in on and purposely ignore the obvious pertinent point then you just respond by calling the person stupid.

The problem with you is you think it's like a fight or something, where one person wins and the other loses and the winner proves he has a bigger willy, i didn't say you were a liar i said you were wrong, there's a difference. The reason you repeat yourself over and over is because when you hit a wall in an argument you just go 'right, fuck, i've hit a wall here, what do i do? I know, i'll just keep repeating the same shit at the person as if they're stupid and not grasping something!'...doesn't really work with adults though I'm afraid.

I didn't say you said or thought humans were expendable or lacking in worth i said an idea that you had espoused had strong implications towards that, again, there's a difference.

If you want to learn something about the various grounds and foundation for human rights and value, pick up philosophy books on the subject, it is well discussed and theories and opinions florish. If you want to learn about the unbroken chain of life that connects us all, pick up elementary school text books on cell biology and evolutionary theory. If you want to fathom the simple concept of intrinsic value, well, just smarten up.

Oh i strive to be worthy of your towering intellect Soulie Mr Science Man throws his toys out of the pram and won't play with me cuz he doesn't like being proved wrong, awwww

Except you have not proven him wrong..............

I know i haven't, i dont get the chance because he just ignores the simple distinction I'm pointing out I dont see what the big deal is, its just a really obvious contradiction in a particular outlook, its not even so much being proved wrong as just having something pointed out, unfortunately some of us dont approach the art of discourse in a very grown up way . I actually like this particular brand of spirituality, even subscribe to it to a point. Edited December 2, 2015 by Len B'stard