10-28-2012, 09:49 PM
|
 |
I'll be benched for a week if I keep these shenanigans up.
|
|
|
|
Re: A revolution in thought
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Conscience works exactly like he described.
|
Unsupported assertion. |
It is supported... |
No, it isn't. You have never offered so much as a shred of support for this claim. Not once. Therefore it remains unsupported.
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spacemonkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
What else is conscience for but to determine whether our actions can be justified when it comes to hurting someone. If we can justify it, our conscience will permit the action. If we can't justify it, our conscience won't let us permit the action.
|
Kindergarten level psychology. What makes you think conscience will always be strong enough to perform this function under his changed conditions? What support do you have for the claim that it will then be impossible to harm others without a justification?
Weasel in 3... 2... 1... |
If he is correct that we must have a justification to harm others... |
Learn to read, Peacegirl. I asked you what makes you think a justification will always be required, and you have started your answer with the conditional assumption that this is the case. So the question you answered is not the question I asked. Try again: What makes you think conscience will always be strong enough to perform this function under his changed conditions? What support do you have for the claim that it will then be impossible to harm others without a justification? |
Bump.
__________________
video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor
|