Losing a foot to gangrene is bad. Losing your life to gangrene is bad. If you could save the latter at the cost of the former, is it worth the cost? If it's the only way to end the danger to your greater wellbeing, is it acceptable
( Read more... )
Since you added the caveat 'should all else fail' then yes, it's a valid method of 'treating' it. And since the only person in a position to decide and determine if everything has been tried is the victim, I don't see where a conundrum is created.
And just to be persnickety (and prove my memory hasn't failed yet!), the line "The dead can't turn to others for support afterward." amused me some. My first thought was actually of Beetlejuice. Rapidly followed by "This kind of flies against Bob's argument to me about the existence of God." ;) If the believers are right, then the dead do indeed have someone/something to turn to afterwards. While there are certain organized religions that say someone who commits suicide doesn't go to heaven, it isn't true across all sects.
Late Reply to a Comment [December 30th, 2010]: I accept the possibility my memory is failing. No, that's a given. Likewise, I know I contradict myself, like multitudinous Walt Whitman's in battle with their doubles from a mirror universe.
Very well. I presume too much in declaring the dead can turn nowhere for aid. Should I argue for a reverse Pasqual's Wager, then? Nah. Let's just stick whether you value the loss dying inflicts on others. If that doesn't matter to you, well, there's little to add to that. Happy trails?
I am only sure of two things: uncertainty and change. Maybe also fatigue. Time...to lie.
Reply from giddybug: "For I'm weary wi' hunting, and fain would lie doon."
Reply from zastrazzi [December 31st, 2010]: Nah. Let's just stick whether you value the loss dying inflicts on others. If that doesn't matter to you, well, there's little to add to that. Happy trails?
There is, I think, an important distinction to be made here. It is possible to attach a value to how others would be impacted by one's death, and still choose it. One shouldn
( ... )
Comments 2
And just to be persnickety (and prove my memory hasn't failed yet!), the line "The dead can't turn to others for support afterward." amused me some. My first thought was actually of Beetlejuice. Rapidly followed by "This kind of flies against Bob's argument to me about the existence of God." ;) If the believers are right, then the dead do indeed have someone/something to turn to afterwards. While there are certain organized religions that say someone who commits suicide doesn't go to heaven, it isn't true across all sects.
Reply
Late Reply to a Comment [December 30th, 2010]:
I accept the possibility my memory is failing. No, that's a given. Likewise, I know I contradict myself, like multitudinous Walt Whitman's in battle with their doubles from a mirror universe.
Very well. I presume too much in declaring the dead can turn nowhere for aid. Should I argue for a reverse Pasqual's Wager, then? Nah. Let's just stick whether you value the loss dying inflicts on others. If that doesn't matter to you, well, there's little to add to that. Happy trails?
I am only sure of two things: uncertainty and change. Maybe also fatigue. Time...to lie.
Reply from giddybug:
"For I'm weary wi' hunting, and fain would lie doon."
Reply from zastrazzi [December 31st, 2010]:
Nah. Let's just stick whether you value the loss dying inflicts on others. If that doesn't matter to you, well, there's little to add to that. Happy trails?
There is, I think, an important distinction to be made here. It is possible to attach a value to how others would be impacted by one's death, and still choose it. One shouldn ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment