Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 423: Line 423:  
::I think you have more of a stake in believing that a "non-believer" would like to kill a child for some kind of gain. I don't see it that way. I don't think there is anything that would make me kill a child. That's silly.  
 
::I think you have more of a stake in believing that a "non-believer" would like to kill a child for some kind of gain. I don't see it that way. I don't think there is anything that would make me kill a child. That's silly.  
 
::Also, I don't have a "little voice" in my head. People who do I deem to be psychotic or lying. Simple as that. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:11, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::Also, I don't have a "little voice" in my head. People who do I deem to be psychotic or lying. Simple as that. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 12:11, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
 +
A hypothetical argument takes a certain statement as an assumption and attempts to analyze it. You seem to be (perhaps intentionally) misunderstanding the hypothetical in the form in which it is presented.  But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and pretend like you really don't understand because of inability to communicate.
 +
 +
Let's change the hypothetical slightly, you state there there is nothing that would make you kill a child. Why would you never kill a child? I understand that you base this decision on reason, but I don't understand the basis of your reason. Is your reason based upon moral codes?  Aren't "moral codes" just superstition to help supress the will of the strong? Is your "reason" based upon what most helps society or is your reason based upon what most helps you?  Why would you ever do anything to help society which ran counter to your own purposes? [[User:Everwill|Everwill]] 15:15, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
.
767

edits

Navigation menu