Deep-thinkers, come (worldview discussion)

#45

yapp3r33

Frags

–

That's not exactly what I was asking. I'll try to rephrase:

You said that women feeling empathy towards fetuses is religious conditioning because, scientifically, there is no reason to feel empathy towards a fetus, it's illogical.

Well, scientifically, there is also no reason to feel any empathy towards animals, yet people feel empathy towards animals and feed them, raise them, cry for them etc.

So, would you take your statement on fetuses to the logical conclusion and say that empathy towards animals is also illogical and conditioned into people by society?

That would make sense to me. If I don't care about a human fetus, why on would I ever care about a dog. I have even less of a bioligical connection to the dog than the fetus, and I already have no bioligical connection to the fetus. If your worldview is consistent, you would agree with me. If not, that's fine, I'm just testing for logical consistency.

-added sentence-

#46

Anguibok

Frags

–

Animal have a conscience, not a human one, but still a conscience, Foetus have not, here is the big difference.

I'm not 100% sure it could be possible to have empathy toward animal without conditioning (some of them might have slighitly human behavior and that's may help a lot), it's possible, since it'a a conscience, but I kinda think the fact a lot of TV show for children showing anthropomorphized animal that are able to talk make in people unconscious a fertile ground to develop empathy toward animals.

PS : Thats also why it will be less accepted to kill pet, they have been domesticated by human, so tend to react more to human, communicate, and be closer to human conscience

PS : Accepting to change opinion on minor things may allow me to keep my consitency, or sometime make some minor change my my view on the world, I think showing me an inconsistency is kinda a force to me

#47

yapp3r33

Frags

–

I'm not 100% sure it could be possible to have empathy toward animal without conditioning (some of them might have slighitly human behavior and that's may help a lot), it's possible, since it'a a conscience, but I kinda think the fact a lot of TV show for children showing anthropomorphized animal that are able to talk make in people unconscious a fertile ground to develop empathy toward animals.

That's my point, really. I just don't understand why the animal then has a higher value just because it has a conscience.

PS : Thats also why it will be less accepted to kill pet, they have been domesticated by human, so tend to react more to human, communicate, and be closer to human conscience

It's still not a human being, doesn't think like a human being, has no intelligent thought, it serves no purpose outside of eating, breathing, and sleeping, which is almost identicle to a fetus, yet the fetus is more acceptable to kill. We can even extend this to humans in comas and severely mentally disabled humans, they have no conscience either or lack most of it.

Logical consistency would dictate that all are acceptable to kill, or neither are.

That's what I enjoy about worldviews though, I have listened to debates where people who are pro-abortion are willing to maintain logical consistency and accept that killing is acceptable in all instances where conscience is lacking or gone. It's impossible to argue against that because it's logical to all degrees.

-added quote-

#48

Anguibok

Frags

–

At least I pass the consistency test ^-^

But yeah I value conscience a lot and I thinks it's a major thing in human evolution that shaped the human race