Yeah so this is basically just the ends justify the means, the mother can literally kill the fetus (which you now admit is a human) if it reduces her own personal suffering. Got it
The mother killing the foetus ? What are you even saying ? We are talking about abortion here, try to keep up.
But yes, if there is suffering because of the pregnancy (which happens in a lot of cases of abortions and I'm not talking about the suffering of normal pregnencies) yes, it is ethical necessity to allow the mother to abort as the death or the suffering of the mother will be much more problematic than a foetus without pain or electrical signal.
The only value we usually give to this foetus to prioritize them rather than the wellbeing of the mother is the belonging to the human specie but this is not what should matter in those circounstance. As the well being of the mother (or father in the case of Trans people) should be prioritized.
So you just posted a picture of "steps" involved in radical change.
Yes, the Nazi could turn into an Anarchist in an instant provided he is immedietly given what he perceives as reason to, just as the fireplace can instantly burn brightly if given lots of wood.
No he could not. I won't debate more on that if you gonna stick to that idealistic vision of change.
Again, - and this is because you are not a leftist it seems - to become an anarchist (and I mean an full on materialistic and feminist anarchist) requires a vision of the world a lot different that being a Nazi. This can't be achieved with a realization in this case.
So no, a Nazi can't turn magically into some kind of anti-state anticapitalist and antimeritocratic, it would require the rewriting of TOO MUCH informations and an amount of understanding and knoledge that is not possible in a one time or even a two time step.
Again, changing takes time.
You aren't using conceptual reasoning. Instant realizations can change our entire relationship with the world because this change is merely our will desiring good A over good B, a function the human will has the capacity to carry out by it's very nature
Yes. Instant realization DOES change our vision of the world, but never entirely.
Also, it will not make you change instantly. The vision of the world =/= the behavior.. There are things called habits and confort zones in our mind. Those can't be shaken in an instant. It takes time. That's why I change my argumentation as I was confusing the discussion by talking about instant change.
This is not what happen. You can have instant realization and a way to change instantly a PART of your vision of the world (or shaken the entirerity)
but you will never change instantly.
Finally, Choices are determined by the material condition of our existence exterior AND interior to our brain. As such when something influence our judgment, our brain reacts and change, this is what create a transformation of character.
This is why Choices are the result of change. Never change itself.
Example: A human with their whole life ahead of them and great plans finds out they are going to die in 1 week. This "sudden" realization, suddenly makes them very detached and cold to the world
Indeed. And this is interesting because this is a case where change happens very quickly. But even in this case, it will not happen instantly.
There will be steps taken toward the end of the transformation. In you example, the person will not instantly find life detached. There will be a period of bargain and denial before that.
Also I never said that change couldn't take very litttle time. Such transformation is radical but not extrem, it could very well happen in the span of a day. In this case, it will not be instant, but it could be very quick in function of the mindset of the person.
If you have other examples that could debunk the non instantaneity of change, go ahead. This one actually made me rethink for a second.
It would be "impossible" the way me holding a knife and told to stab myself is "impossible", it's very unlikely but not physically impossible
Well, if you take the mind as a material and physical thing... yes. It's precisely physically impossible. At least if we consider that there exist only one universe and the particule motion differences are not what creates new universes (and thus one where you would, for some reason, suddenly become sociopathic)
The gap between it being very unlikely, and literally impossible, is an infinite gap which through reason you can't identify. Where exactly does it become impossible?
It is impossible because there is absolutely 0 reasons in your experience or genetic or physical constrain that could create a choice to let the person die. Of course I can be wrong and you could be a psychopath undercover, but I don't know a single person who would let the person they love the most die like that if they can simply push a button.
It would be plainly irrationnal, which means that you would need to have a mindset that is sociopathic at that moment for refusing to do so as everything in your being will push you to push the button.
As such, you are not free of the choice you make, in reality the situation was already decided long before you make the choice in this case. All the physical constraint and your experience and memory would push the electrical signal to make you push the button in this situation. Creating the illusion of the choice of pushing the button.
But there is no choice. It's you who pushes the button, but you are part of the grand mechanism of the universe, you are not outside of it. And so, you cannot create ex-nihillo a consciousness out of the bound of this universe to push the universe to make your body push that button.
I know it's scary, but I think it's also beautiful. The absence of free will does not prevent our existence, we do exist, we are simply not in control. We simply have the illusion of it.
And as such we must create a system that take this data into account. If we are a part of the mechanism, it means that we can't blame or punish an individual behavior as any individual behavior is part of the entire system which means that the entire system is US.
We do need to act through the illusion tho (and you should see here kind of a paradox) we are in an illusion but we need to act as we are not but in reality when I'm telling you that it's the system pushing me to tell you that we need to push toward a better system and act through the illusion which is in reality a paradox because there is no control... Etc.
We are part of the system, but our action and our will to better it is also part of it. So this will to change the world is perfectly normal and logical, it's part of the illusion.
Which means that in the end, we must act as if we can have control to create a system where we know we don't have it. It's kind of a mindblowing thing when you think about it, but this is how we will create a real utopia.
Again, your hypothetical lists a scenario in which the will is pressured but not, in the metaphysical sense, forced.
Indeed, there is no "forcing", i'm only using this word to make you understand the absence of free will. In reality, this choice will be the logical physical consequences of the material conditions of your existence and the state of the universe at this very point.
Inclination is not necessity. The burden of proof is on you to show me where this strong emotional inclination to press the button, ceases being a mere inclination and becomes an innate necessity, akin to how 2 + 2 necessarily equals 4, and is not merely inclined to equal 4.
Well, I can prove that very easily with a simple question.
If the person you love the most was in danger of imminent death, that there is no conflict between you and this person, that your mind was not altered in any way, that you only had to push a button to save them and that there was no physical or individual constrains preventing you to do it. In what case would you NOT do it ?
This should prove me right or wrong. If you find a scenario where you would not do it, then the discussion should become more interesting. You are the proof.
So you agree that instant, radical change of the will from evil to good can happen for rapists, enslavers, tortures, kidnappers...
Instant radical
realization* not change.
CF what I said above.
For a murderer, an extrem change or an extrem realization are not necessarily necessary. People kill other people for a whole load of reasons. And sometimes those reasons are even legitimated by the context.
For others, to become the opposite of their actions, they would need entirely new diverses visions of the world. Instant realization could kill them so it's highly improbable, but instant radical realization is possible. Change - as I explained previously tho - would take time in those cases. Always.
I'm not going to debate this. You're just going to use probabilistic arguments again about why it's unlikely for them to truly change but not impossible.
If you want to argue what the odds are that a criminal will change their behavior after the death penalty or some shit, we can debate that instead but I am not going to waste time making conceptual arguments to an empiricist
It's not empirism, it's physical logic.
My vision of free will and change does not come from my experience, but my knowledge of the material reality of our universe. I'm using that in those case.
Your vision, on the other hand, is idealistic. It's not based on reality but what you would like reality to be.
You say it rarely happens, this implies it is a possibility, just as it is a possibility that the criminal change after being threatened with death penalty
If you want to argue the odds of that, go ahead, but you can't use language like "impossible" and then say it's "rarely" instant, which implies chance is possibility albeit a slight one
Yeah scrap that post of mine. This was confusing for the discussion. Change is not instant. it can be quick, but it's a transformation that takes time.
Choice are the result of that transformation. What was instant in this example, was the realization of the situation.
In storytelling we do not talk about realization as an information that creates change, in reality, we talk about realizations as an informations that make us understand who we really are and who we really have become. (You will understand it by reading Truby)
Realization like this are internal, we are put in front of a mirror that make us make a choice. This choice being the result of the entire journey to go there. For Jack, this choice was the result of 3 movies of slow transformation.
It's possible for a criminal to fulfill all of these after being threatened with extreme punishment such as the death penalty.
If you want to argue why that's unlikely, we can go there
I do not think it's possible when we know the material reality of the world.
And extrem pressure does not transform you into something your are not, or it would need to be a traumatic trigger
. What is most likely on the other hand, is that those person ALREADY had started to change before this punishment.
To change in an instant into a non dangerous person, I repeat that, the person would need to have access IN AN INSTANT to a mass of informations and understanding that it is just not possible to give at such speed and even less possible in prison.
FOr ex: To become safe when if you just raped, you need to understand the importance of consent. BUT to understand the importance of consent, you also need to have empathic trigger that pushes you toward this understanding BUT you also need to understand whywhat you did is problematics for women because of the knowledge of feminist notions, OR you will do it again.
The simple realization that they did something bad will not make the person safer as they will do it again because of the lack of understanding and empathic behavior.
This can't happen in an instant. What could happen on the other hand, is for the prisonner to discover an information so hardcore about their actions to get them trauma and to change radically their behavior (I don't know, maybe if you tell a man who was denied to see his child during her growth (a child that he loved), that the woman he just raped was his own daughter... then yeah.. this would be a case where you could trigger a traumatic response. This is unlikely but possible. Tho.. the result wouldn't be safer, just much more instable.)
Yeah so again, your argument is "XYZ is possible but unlikely", but you don't want to use probabilistic language and instead go for damntatory language like "not possible" for some reason
It is not inherently impossible for extreme change to happen and for trauma to not be incurred, it's just unlikely
Yeas, I refuse to fall into idealism and think that change can magically happen because of our will. This is contrary to the material reality of the world.
Extreme change is possible, but never instant unless trauma. I say that because it's simply the logical way to view change. Of course I have no data to make you understand that, but it's just what happens.
Extrem change is a change so radical that it transforms you into something completely opposite to what you were. This is impossible if you do not rewrite the entirerity of your THOUSANDS of vision of the world. This kind of change is LONG, it can't happen in one day. it would create such a trauma that it would kill the person.
I'm kinda done repeating this over and over. You need to understand this. it's not possible. Instant change will not happen, so extrem change is even more unlikely. Change takes times.
What you are talking are realizations. Radical ones can happen and make you change quickly, extrem ones can also happen and change you quickly but they will trauma you.
Change = Takes Time - The more radical the realization, the quicker it is. But it's not instant.
Realization = Instant. - The more extrem it is, the more traumatic it can become.
He's a Redditor. All of his arguments are derived from an empirical outlook which cannot reason beyond observed data or patterns that tend to occur in humans
No mate. They are derived from the material reality of the world. If you have data showing me that people have been instantly changed (and I mean in less than a minute) radically, then go ahead, show me.
But this is not how change works. Not even reality.
You are the idealist here. You believe that by sheer will, you can make the choice to change. It's not how reality works. Change happens over time, our choice are the result of this change. As such, trying to force change is problematic because it can create instability.
He says extreme change of will, proved overtime by his improved behavior, cannot possibly occur in a criminal (because it doesn't tend to happen often; an empirical/scientific observation), but pure logic says otherwise as this is a necessary function of the will (conceptual/mathematical understanding of the will)
No. It can happen, but not instantly and not in a prison without an access to knowledge or a way to create a fundamental empathic understanding of the world.
You are confusing instant change and change overtime. Trying to justify punishment as a way to create instant change. But punishment do not create instant change, it can only create an instant realization. That can - over time - create extrem change.
But time is needed ! If you punish the person, you will negate that time and you will only kill a person that had only a clue, not the full picture. If the person dies, the person will not die changed, they will only die with a key to move toward change.. so they will die in incomprehension. On top of that, it's a negation of a potential force for good so this is not helping at all.
Punishment is by defaut unproductive and potentially harmfull.
Another exist. A much more productive and ethical one. But for that, we also need to get rid of all the oppressive systems in the world.
Rather than trying to solve a math problem (is it possible for criminal to radically change behavior) using science
I'm using science. What I'm telling you is literally sociology applied here.
You are just refusing the reasonning. You need to understand the difference between the concepts I'm using here because I think you are confusing them at the moment. And I can't really make them simpler.
Small realization : A simple instant realization, that does not necessarily create change
Radical realization : A instant realization that will create a big change
Extrem realization : An instant realization that will induce Trauma and a potential instant change.
Those three type of realization are instant. Only the third can create an instant change. Simply because it will be so traumatic that it will rewire our brain in a new way. (For ex: people with Dissociative Identity Disorder Disease often went through this kind of realization, in the sence that a traumatic event happened to them which completely change their perception of the world and rewired their brain).
Small change : A change that transform you into something really close to what you were in term of mindset or knowledge.
Radical change : A change that transform radically your vision of the world and your behavior in relation to that.
Extrem change : A change that transform you and your behavior but also your entire vision of the world into the opposite.
Those three change take time. It's possible for an extrem change to happen ONLY if it induce a form of trauma because it's impossible to do such a change without consequences in an instant.
Nop. I have other things to read for the moment. Ask nicer next time.
I've already cornered him. He is squirming at this point
You are the one corned bro and you are not even realizing it
BDS will never accomplish anything
They already did....
