glassjester
Well-known member
Oh crap, I edited your post again.
Canada to initiate Project Soylent
- Thread starter musterion
- Start date
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok.
GJ: Who should be allowed to kill himself?
AB: Terminally ill people.
GJ: Because of their pain or their limited time left? - From this we can infer that your definition of a terminally ill individual (like Art's) is one where said individual endures both pain and has limited time left to live.
AB: Both
GJ: Then if either of those aspects is missing, they do not have the right to suicide? You've just spun yourself out of your own inferred definition (see above).
Moreover, show me a terminally ill person that's not in pain.:idunno:
AB: Yes
GJ: Then a man who will die in a few months, but is not in pain, and a man who is in constant pain, but has years to live, should both not be allowed to kill themselves, right? :think:
AB: No.
GJ: That is inconsistent.
No, that's a classic straw-man construction, on your behalf.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
What part of jester's comment has you confused?
GJ: Because of their pain or their limited time left?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
:chuckle:
That's the beginning of jester's dog-n-pony show:
Follow the conversation doser.
GJ: Who should be allowed to kill himself?
AB: Terminally ill people.
GJ: Because of their pain or their limited time left? Jester just reiterated/defined/finely-tuned AB's statement regarding terminally ill people. :duh:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
ok - let's unpack it
GJ: Who should be allowed to kill himself?
AB: Terminally ill people.
and what aspect/quality of terminally ill people puts them in a unique position of being allowed to kill themselves?
Is it:
A. Their pain?
or
B. Their limited time left?
or
C. other?
if i write it this way, it's apparent to me that these aren't necessary attributes of being terminally ill, especially when we consider that earlier in the conversation we had agreed that all of us are terminally ill (and thus the "limited time" aspect disappears)
and it hadn't been covered, but I've worked with many terminally ill patients who were not in pain
and so, not a redefinition of artie's term
GJ: Who should be allowed to kill himself?
AB: Terminally ill people.
and what aspect/quality of terminally ill people puts them in a unique position of being allowed to kill themselves?
Is it:
A. Their pain?
or
B. Their limited time left?
or
C. other?
if i write it this way, it's apparent to me that these aren't necessary attributes of being terminally ill, especially when we consider that earlier in the conversation we had agreed that all of us are terminally ill (and thus the "limited time" aspect disappears)
and it hadn't been covered, but I've worked with many terminally ill patients who were not in pain
and so, not a redefinition of artie's term
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
there are no other attributes of a terminally ill person?
i've already demonstrated that neither A nor B are necessary attributes
surely there must be some other attribute that defines a terminally ill person
perhaps...
C. suffering from an incurable disease state
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
in fact:
nothing in there about pain
and "short period of time" is subjective - does that mean five minutes? five days? five years?
| Terminal illness is a disease that cannot be cured or adequately treated and that is reasonably expected to result in the death of the patient within a short period of time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_illness |
nothing in there about pain
and "short period of time" is subjective - does that mean five minutes? five days? five years?
No, both are indeed necessary conditions though when artfully separated, neither are - alone - sufficient conditions. (learn the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions) The convenient parsing of the two is how jester's smoke and mirrors works.
Righties are quite dense.
Superfluous.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
as i've said, i have personal experience working with terminally ill patients who are not in pain
i'm always amused when people argue against accepted definitions :chuckle:
grasping at straw.
Is that it? :idunno:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
well, i'd say so, unless you want to continue with this:
"From this we can infer that your definition of a terminally ill individual (like Art's) is one where said individual endures both pain and has limited time left to live."
you're the one making the poor inference :idunno:
:idunno: Drop the pain assertion if you want...jester wasn't making an argument that people in pain shouldn't be allowed suicide, while his parsing tactic won't work without it.
Irrelevant.
You can argue definitions all day....but those where the terms jester was using and subsequently split.
