Rant-y
Is there any writing of Peter Kreeft that a) Doesn't include blatant assumptions b) Sophistry and c) Appeals to Emotion or Authority?
I've just read "The Apple Argument Against Abotion." It's the single least compelling argument on abortion there is. The gist is if we "know" what an apple is, then we must overthrow Roe v. Wade. His arguments center around trying to prove that a fetus is actually human (The whole thing can be countered easily with the violinist thought experiment).
These are particularly irritating...
5. We have human rights because we are human
The fifth principle is the indispensable, common-sensical basis for human rights: We have human rights because we are human beings.
I hate arguments from "common-sense", it's asinine... Convicted felons are uncontroversially human, but their actions have made their rights forfeit. Their rights to liberty (And in some cases, life) are revoked when they have violated the terms of the social contract.
I was going to write more, but I'm tired and mildly annoyed...
I've just read "The Apple Argument Against Abotion." It's the single least compelling argument on abortion there is. The gist is if we "know" what an apple is, then we must overthrow Roe v. Wade. His arguments center around trying to prove that a fetus is actually human (The whole thing can be countered easily with the violinist thought experiment).
These are particularly irritating...
5. We have human rights because we are human
The fifth principle is the indispensable, common-sensical basis for human rights: We have human rights because we are human beings.
I hate arguments from "common-sense", it's asinine... Convicted felons are uncontroversially human, but their actions have made their rights forfeit. Their rights to liberty (And in some cases, life) are revoked when they have violated the terms of the social contract.
I was going to write more, but I'm tired and mildly annoyed...