View Single Post
Old 07-06-2010, 06:18 PM   #709
troymc
Groupie
troymc will become famous soon enoughtroymc will become famous soon enoughtroymc will become famous soon enoughtroymc will become famous soon enoughtroymc will become famous soon enoughtroymc will become famous soon enough
 
Posts: 161
Karma: 608
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Plano, TX
Device: Sony PRS-505 + B&N Nook + Motion LE1700 + Motorola Xoom Wifi
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGS View Post
This is really interesting -so far two sorts of features seem to warrant embracing things in our moral purview; one feature is that the thing in question should have feelings and the other is that it should have life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WT Sharpe View Post
The opinion of Peter Singer is that the ability to experience pain is tantamount. Hence, in his philosophy, abortions that are performed prior to conscious awareness is no breech of ethics.
I would point "feelings" back to "life" by saying "quality of life". It's not enough to simply have life [eg. caged animal.] Life is the base but not the only value involved. Once you start broadening the question other values and other facets of existing values come into play [eg. is the value of life itself simply a facet of the value of creation vs destruction?]

Definitions of life get fuzzy fast. And, in my belief, is were we start approaching the limits of human knowledge/understanding. I don't think we'll ever truly understand what a plant "feels" - at least not without an (r)evolution of our own. Why is the life of a 300 yr old tree seen as less than a human who may only live to 70? what if it was cut down simply for the firewood to keep someone warm for a week? or for a table?


Troy
troymc is offline   Reply With Quote