Philosophers advocate killing newborns

12 3 4 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Philosophers advocate killing newborns
OP - March 03, 2012, 08:30 AM

No, I'm not taking the piss. This actually happened, and it's a very juicy topic to get your teeth into if you want to think about the pros and cons.

Source

Also see this

Quote
KILLING newborn babies should be allowed if the mother wishes, Australian philosophers have argued in a prestigious journal.

Their argument, that it is morally the same as abortion, has forced the British Medical Journal to defend its publication of their views.

In an article that has sparked outrage around the world and elicited death threats, Monash University's Alberto Giubilini and the University of Melbourne's Francesca Minerva say that a foetus and a newborn both lack a sense of life and aspiration.

They argue this justifies "after-birth abortion" on the proviso it is painless as the baby is not missing out on a life it cannot contemplate.

The doctors of philosophy argue in the BMJ publication Journal of Medical Ethics that one-third of infants with Down syndrome are not diagnosed in the womb, which means mothers of children with severe disabilities should have the chance to end a child's life after, as well as before, birth.

However, the pair also want the principle of killing newborns extended to healthy babies, because a mother who is unwilling to care for it outweighs an infant's right to life.

In the article, After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?, the authors argue: "A serious philosophical problem arises when the same conditions that would have justified abortion become known after birth. In such cases, we need to assess facts in order to decide whether the same arguments that apply to killing a human fetus can also be consistently applied to killing a newborn human."

They also write that the practice should be called "after-birth abortion" and not "infanticide" to "emphasise that the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a foetus (on which 'abortions' in the traditional sense are performed) rather than to that of a child".

"We claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk. Accordingly, a second terminological specification is that we call such a practice ?after-birth abortion? rather than ?euthanasia? because the best interest of the one who dies is not necessarily the primary criterion for the choice, contrary to what happens in the case of euthanasia."

Although the authors claim that the "moral status of an infant is equivalent to that of a fetus, that is, neither can be considered a 'person' in a morally relevant sense", they concede it is hard to exactly determine when a subject starts or ceases to be a "person".

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- BerberElla
- Class A'sexual
- Creator Goddess
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #1 - March 03, 2012, 08:34 AM

Ugh. I can not even find the words.

Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
- Sprout
- You are alive, live!
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #2 - March 03, 2012, 08:39 AM

I wouldn't get worked up quickly, philosophers often say out there things without intending them in the same way you or I would.

"Nobody who lived through the '50s thought the '60s could've existed. So there's always hope."-Tuli Kupferberg

What apple stores are like.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8QmZWv-eBI
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #3 - March 03, 2012, 09:57 AM

Quote from: Sprout on March 03, 2012, 08:39 AM
I wouldn't get worked up quickly, philosophers often say out there things without intending them in the same way you or I would.

Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, who published that paper in that link are not Philosophers ., "THEY ARE STUPID DOCTORS"

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- paranoid
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #4 - March 03, 2012, 10:33 AM

This, I must read more, find more link and reference.
My belief of euthanasia and the right to kill baby is contradicting.
I believe every baby have a right to live,but in the same time I believe every person should have their right to decide their life.

anyone with speedy internet and fast reading skill, your wisdom please!
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #5 - March 03, 2012, 10:39 AM

Quote from: yeezevee on March 03, 2012, 09:57 AM
Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva, who published that paper in that link are not Philosophers ., "THEY ARE STUPID DOCTORS"

I suggest you check their profiles again.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #6 - March 03, 2012, 10:43 AM

Peter Singer has been making this argument for some time. For those who don't know Singer wrote Animal Liberation-- so he thinks it's morally wrong to use animals for food or clothing, but it's okay to kill a newborn. Gotta love these people.

Here's where I think the argument by the ethicists in the article referenced above fails-- it uses an entirely utilitarian framework and doesn't at all acknowledge that many (perhaps most) advocates of abortion rights take at least a partially deonotological view of the issue-- specifically that women have a natural right to control their own bodies.

Now that one premise alone doesn't resolve the abortion debate as some would argue the fetus has a right to life which trumps the woman's right to control her body, which is why the US Supreme Court tried to balance these two rights in a pragmatic compromise in Roe v. Wade that the state may impose restrictions on abortion only in the third trimester when the fetus is viable outside the womb.

However, once the baby is born, then the woman's right to control her own body is no longer relevant, thus any right to life the newborn possesses would trump any utilitarian calculus even if the child isn't fully a "person" in the sense of having aspirations, self-consciousness or whatever other definitions these ethicists want to attach to "personhood"

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- paranoid
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #7 - March 03, 2012, 11:04 AM

That crystal clear berbs,thanks, I think I need to play more word game to enriched my english.
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #8 - March 03, 2012, 11:10 AM

Dammit Q, change your pic I keep thinking your berberella, lol
Nice phil chops though

I haven't read the article yet nor have I heard of Singer's arguments for it, but I can see how it would stem from his utilitarianism, or at least could. Though I doubt Singer would advocate this in any realistic case -- I mean if it were a strict choice in this case he would concede, but since there are so many other options like adoption, abortion etc.. the scenario described would never happen.

Quote
However, the pair also want the principle of killing newborns extended to healthy babies, because a mother who is unwilling to care for it outweighs an infant's right to life.

This is exactly the fallacy -- this scenario would never happen, so the point is moot. (Not to mention the numerous prudential reasons why we could never comprehend the outcomes of utilitarian calculus.)

It's an issue to tread carefully around though -- I could see a lot of people being backed into a corner when they try to give reasons why it is permissible to kill animals and not baby humans. (Not saying the two are necessarily connected, though I have seen a lot of people become backed into this corner.)
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #9 - March 03, 2012, 11:12 AM

Notice all these baby-killing asshole philosophers, including Singer, are from Australia? The problem isn't philosophers, it's Australians.

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- paranoid
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #10 - March 03, 2012, 11:14 AM

dang you raccoon rapist, I thought it was berb, when will you tell me how did you steal berb avatar. I wanna steal os avatar
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #11 - March 03, 2012, 11:16 AM

Quote from: Raccoon Rapist on March 03, 2012, 11:12 AM
Notice all these baby-killing asshole philosophers, including Singer, are from Australia? The problem isn't philosophers, it's Australians.

godamned criminals.
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #12 - March 03, 2012, 11:18 AM

Quote from: osmanthus on March 03, 2012, 10:39 AM
I suggest you check their profiles again.

yes I checked their Profiles.. So they are Ph.Ds?? so what?? did you read their paper?? download and read it

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #13 - March 03, 2012, 11:23 AM

I don't have to download it. I can read it online. I'm the one who linked you it it, remember?

I have read it, but it's late and I want to think about it some more.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #14 - March 03, 2012, 11:26 AM

Damn straight you do.

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #15 - March 03, 2012, 11:32 AM

I believe lately that morality can be "grounded" only in prudentiality, and killing newborns just doesn't fit that bill, it seems.
I don't really have much more to say about it. I think trying to find a solid reason for or against it other than prudential or societal reasons would run into problems. (Even via some sort of deontological maxim, though I'm sure someone could prove otherwise on this last point.)
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #16 - March 03, 2012, 11:33 AM

Quote from: osmanthus on March 03, 2012, 11:23 AM
I don't have to download it. I can read it online. I'm the one who linked you it it, remember?

I have read it, but it's late and I want to think about it some more.

Yes.. That is just an abstract.. you should read full paper and its implications if those philosophers are appointed as court jesters by that Australian govt..

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #17 - March 03, 2012, 11:38 AM

Quote from: zoomi on March 03, 2012, 11:32 AM
I believe lately that morality can be "grounded" only in prudentiality, and killing newborns just doesn't fit that bill, it seems.
I don't really have much more to say about it. I think trying to find a solid reason for or against it other than prudential or societal reasons would run into problems. (Even via some sort of deontological maxim, though I'm sure someone could prove otherwise on this last point.)

It's wrong to willfully kill people who haven't done any wrong and who's lives do not directly threaten the lives of others. Newborn infants have done no wrong, and until such point as global society would demand a zero population growth or close to it, neither do they directly threaten the lives of others in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances. I don't think any more complex reasoning is necessary on this issue.

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #18 - March 03, 2012, 11:38 AM

Yeez, I know the difference between an abstract and a paper.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #19 - March 03, 2012, 11:40 AM

Quote from: Raccoon Rapist on March 03, 2012, 11:38 AM
It's wrong to willfully kill people who haven't done any wrong and who's lives do not directly threaten the lives of others.

Define "people".

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #20 - March 03, 2012, 11:41 AM

No. Take your baby-killing Australian reasoning elsewhere.

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #21 - March 03, 2012, 11:43 AM

Quote from: Raccoon Rapist on March 03, 2012, 11:38 AM
It's wrong to willfully kill people who haven't done any wrong and who's lives do not directly threaten the lives of others. Newborn infants have done no wrong, and until such point as global society would demand a zero population growth or close to it, neither do they directly threaten the lives of others in all but the most extraordinary of circumstances. I don't think any more complex reasoning is necessary on this issue.

I more or less agree with this, though I still reckon it is at least partially related to societal context. Who knows though, I'm just pondering -- I never cared much for ethics.
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #22 - March 03, 2012, 11:44 AM

Quote from: osmanthus on March 03, 2012, 11:40 AM
Define "people".

Quote from: Raccoon Rapist on March 03, 2012, 11:41 AM
No. Take your baby-killing Australian reasoning elsewhere.

Haha, methinks this is an elaborate ruse by os to take the piss out of philosophers
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #23 - March 03, 2012, 11:47 AM

Quote from: zoomi on March 03, 2012, 11:43 AM
I more or less agree with this, though I still reckon it is at least partially related to societal context. Who knows though, I'm just pondering -- I never cared much for ethics.

Ethics and political philosophy are the only two subsets of philosophy that really matter in my opinion (now that natural philosophy has become its own field we now call "science").

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- zoomi
- Dusty-footed philosopher.
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #24 - March 03, 2012, 11:53 AM

Meh to each their own, I do consider them sometimes, though as I said I don't think they can be grounded in anything, so it's mostly just prudentials.

personally I'd just rather block out society, crawl into a cave and play around with weird theories about mathematics and physics
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #25 - March 03, 2012, 12:19 PM

Quote from: zoomi on March 03, 2012, 11:44 AM
Haha, methinks this is an elaborate ruse by os to take the piss out of philosophers

No. I actually thought this one was interesting.

Quote from: zoomi on March 03, 2012, 11:43 AM
I never cared much for ethics.

Now that one is ripe for quoting out of context.

Odd that someone who is interested in philosophy would not be interested in one of the few practical applications of it. Surely this is one of the few areas where it could possibly do some real good.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #26 - March 03, 2012, 12:30 PM

Quote from: osmanthus on March 03, 2012, 12:19 PM
No. I actually thought this one was interesting.

Now that one is ripe for quoting out of context.

Odd that someone who is interested in philosophy would not be interested in one of the few practical applications of it. Surely this is one of the few areas where it could possibly do some real good.

You got to read WHOLE PAPER osmanthus., then we can discuss, I am reading it...

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
- osmanthus
- Cave dwelling
- Pub Regular
- Fingerer of piglets
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #27 - March 03, 2012, 12:36 PM

Yeez, how many times do I have to tell you: I have read the whole paper. The content of the PDF is exactly the same as the full text that is available online. I read the whole friggin thing in less than ten minutes.

Devious, treacherous, murderous, neanderthal, sub-human of the West.
- RaccoonR
- AKA Colonel Q-Daffi
- Pub Regular
- Oh yeah, baby!
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #28 - March 03, 2012, 12:44 PM

"In battle, the well-honed spork is more dangerous than the mightiest sword" -- Sun Tzu
- yeezevee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Philosophers advocate killing newborns
Reply #29 - March 03, 2012, 12:46 PM

Quote from: osmanthus on March 03, 2012, 12:36 PM
Yeez, how many times do I have to tell you: I have read the whole paper.

Oh ..O.k., I was under the impression you just read Abstract
Quote
The content of the PDF is exactly the same as the full text that is available online. I read the whole friggin thing in less than ten minutes.

..

You are smart and intelligent Mr. osmanthus., So what is that .. You support killing the kids if mother thinks the kid should be killed?? You are not confused this with Fetus abortion right??..

I am sure you know well that is a very big and controversial subject .. now these Philosophers extended that too Kids..

Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything
I renounced my faith to become a kafir,
the beloved betrayed me and turned in to a Muslim
12 3 4 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »