c630cd0a
XPost: alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian, alt.zen, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
XPost: alt.philosophy.zen
From: whoduh@murderispositiveaction.com
On Fri, 28 May 2010 17:39:33 -0700 (PDT), "Mr.Smartypants"
wrote:
>On May 28, 5:11 pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"
>wrote:
>> On 5/28/2010 3:46 PM, halfawake wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > DT wrote:
>>
>> >> Fred C. Dobbs wrote:
>>
>> >>> It can't be. To talk about "better than" or "worse than" is
>> >>> necessarily to be comparing two states of welfare, but there is only
>> >>> one state of welfare in this putative comparison. It is abject
>> >>> nonsense to suggest a person might rationally think he is "better
>> >>> off" for existing rather than never existing, because the flip side
>> >>> is that the person would be "worse off" for never existing - but
>> >>> there wouldn't be a person to experience the "worse off" condition if
>> >>> the person never existed.
>>
>> >>> This is not the same as a person who exists with a miserable welfare
>> >>> thinking he'd prefer to die. Even then, it makes no sense for the
>> >>> person to think he'd be "better off" if he ended his existence,
>> >>> because again, there would be no entity to experience the better
>> >>> welfare. It still can make sense for the person with a miserable
>> >>> welfare to want to die, if his existence is intolerable to him.
>>
>> >> OK, how about this: everybody...and I mean *EVERYBODY*... admit, right
>> >> here, right now, that Fred is right.
>>
>> >> Then maybe he'll shut up...
>>
>> >> DT
>>
>> > ha ha
>>
>> > I wish I could stop...
>>
>> You seem to have very little self control.-
>
>
>Said the Goober who goes into fits of rage over everything.
you would diminish each others importance to ignore each other.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
