Hi there, and welcome to what is destined to become your new favourite blog. Unless, of course, you're not very cool. In which case, you probably won't like it very much.

My name is Lance.

I'm a Philosophy major using a philosopher's toolbox to investigate philosophy (that's so meta), politics, literature, nutrition & fitness, education, psychology, sociology, history, science, religion, technology, the general human condition, and more.

Activities that I enjoy include making bad jokes, playing chess, go, & other strategy games, solving puzzles, cooking, eating food drenched in hot sauce, exercising, reading, writing, socializing, taking long walks, and generally striving towards self-improvement and living a fulfilling, virtuous, happy life.

A thoughtful counter-argument is always more appealing to me than unthinking agreement.

 

The main result of Milgram’s study seems to be one he does not stress: the presence of conscience in most subjects, and their pain when obedience made them act against their conscience. Thus, while the experiment can be interpreted as another proof of the easy dehumanization of man, the subjects’ reactions show rather the contrary—the presence of intense forces within them that find cruel behavior intolerable. This suggests an important approach to the study of cruelty in real life: to consider not only cruel behavior, but the—often unconscious—guilty conscience of those who obey authority. Milgram’s experiment is a good illustration of the difference between the conscious and unconscious aspects of behavior, even though no use has been made of it to explore this difference.

Erich Fromm, The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness

Foucault was best known for his critiques of power structures, and for hyphenating words.

gamsee:

forevertheuke:

ipissedinyourmountaindew:

Real satellite imagery from NASA
We are killing out planet.

NoThat’s just the united stated photoshopped on the moon.

no thats our dying planet have some respect

gamsee:

forevertheuke:

ipissedinyourmountaindew:

Real satellite imagery from NASA

We are killing out planet.

No
That’s just the united stated photoshopped on the moon.

no thats our dying planet have some respect

Human beings are terrible with multiple negations. ‘It is not the case that no one will come to no party not next week.’ I can’t do it.

Logic professor (via philosophyprofessorquotes)

I’ve been trying to wrap my brain around this for a couple minutes now… I think it’s saying that it’s not the case that everyone will be attending parties except for next week… Which seems… True. I think.

It’s made more complicated by the fact that saying someone is attending “no party” is really atypical and difficult to process even without the double-negation.

semper-spes-est:

proud-to-be-pro-choice:

by-grace-of-god:

Abortion and the Holocaust are not fundamentally different.
Unborn babies are not any less human.

How curious indeed that you equate the abortion of non-sentinent fetuses to people who have watched their loved ones get shot, gassed, starved, beaten, or exhausted and then follow the same fate.
Pro-lifers often claim that pro-choicers don’t value human life. But to place the deaths of 6 million Jews, homosexuals and politicians at the same level of non-viable fetuses is more demeaning than anything I’ve seen a pro-choicer do. ~Bev

That is because you don’t have the nerve to see both as infringements upon the sanctity of life. Nazi’s also experimented with sterilization and hoped to wipe out the Jewish race by precluding their proliferation. Abortion accomplishes nothing elss even if it isn’t implemented at the level of genocide and mass killings. The result is less people and given the statistics, less blacks and latinos.

The analogy seems like it’s harmful to the possibility of dialogue between the two camps—“the possibility” rather than “the dialogue” because there’s very little conversation that’s extant at this point in time. The situations are different; but they’re also the same. They’re the same in ways that pro-lifers value (the sanctity of life is being destroyed) while different in ways that pro-choicers value (the differences between an adult and a fetus). The analogy seems to serve the purpose of making it even more difficult to discuss that difference in values and figure out which is more normatively valuable.

semper-spes-est:

proud-to-be-pro-choice:

by-grace-of-god:

Abortion and the Holocaust are not fundamentally different.

Unborn babies are not any less human.

How curious indeed that you equate the abortion of non-sentinent fetuses to people who have watched their loved ones get shot, gassed, starved, beaten, or exhausted and then follow the same fate.

Pro-lifers often claim that pro-choicers don’t value human life. But to place the deaths of 6 million Jews, homosexuals and politicians at the same level of non-viable fetuses is more demeaning than anything I’ve seen a pro-choicer do. ~Bev

That is because you don’t have the nerve to see both as infringements upon the sanctity of life. Nazi’s also experimented with sterilization and hoped to wipe out the Jewish race by precluding their proliferation. Abortion accomplishes nothing elss even if it isn’t implemented at the level of genocide and mass killings. The result is less people and given the statistics, less blacks and latinos.

The analogy seems like it’s harmful to the possibility of dialogue between the two camps—“the possibility” rather than “the dialogue” because there’s very little conversation that’s extant at this point in time. The situations are different; but they’re also the same. They’re the same in ways that pro-lifers value (the sanctity of life is being destroyed) while different in ways that pro-choicers value (the differences between an adult and a fetus). The analogy seems to serve the purpose of making it even more difficult to discuss that difference in values and figure out which is more normatively valuable.

(Source: facebook.com)