@Shamar @noelle
Would that mean that:
- if another species was equally intelligent to humans, but its DNA was very different from that of a human, it wouldn't be a person?
- if a non-biological creature, eg. an electronic one, was as intelligent as humans, it wouldn't be a person?
- if you uploaded your mind to a computer, the copy of your mind wouldn't be a person?

@Wolf480pl @noelle

Assuming common meaning of #person (from Latin, "per se unum", that is a well defined single entity holding human rights)

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3. Yes.

Now we could grant human #rights to #intelligent aliens, non biological intelligences and even software simulators if we like (with some issues for human beings... but you know... with propaganda... 😉)

But we could not make these human, even if we call them "person".

A human #embryo, instead IS a #human.

@Wolf480pl @noelle

The mention of #Turing test to identify humans shows how deep penetrated #Capitalism #propaganda.

Humans are not #things!
We are not #tools!

Every single human on Earth could fail the Turing test. After a tongue- or brain-demaging incident, for example.

If a #human cannot STOP being a human, why the hell should it "become" a human at a certain point in life?

So if the life begin at #conception, it's already a human #life.

It's simply #logic, IMHO.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
The ugly truth is that a human can indeed become something that is no longer truly a person.
The even uglier is that a fetus can have genetic defects that would just cause them and/or others suffering. If you can detect these defects soon after conception then it is acceptable to choose not to bring such a child into the world.
1/2

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
There is also a "fun" thought experiment.

Imagine that you are in a hospital. To your left are 10 month old embryos, to your right is a 10 year old kid. The hospital is on fire, the hallway you are in will collapse, you must choose who you save:
10 _potential_ children
or
1 actual living child

what do you choose?

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

To save both.

Or to lose both and my life.

To me, there is no way to choose a human life over another. Each human is unique and unrepeatable and cannot be counted with another. The value of a human life is orthogonal to each other life, so just like I can't say if 1k+2m/s is more or less than 5Watt+2apple+1Hz, I cannot choose who to save in such thought experiment (everything else being equal).

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle

also, whoops, i meant to write "10 1 month old" first, but then i thought the two numbers are harder to read to i shortened it to "month old"

so, they are 1 month old

there are 10 of them

just wanted to clarify that

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
And is there no number N for which you would choose the fetuses over the child?

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Is there a number N where you would choose the speed over the apples?

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

These not truths, they are opinions. Not particularly rooted in science I would add, since several physicians I know (including my wife) say that a fetus does not survive if it's genes are so defective to be incompatible with life.

Obviously there are exceptions, but even so they are still human.

To me it's not accepable to kill a human, just because he cannot produce and consume.

This is true for a paralized adult and for a Down child. ..

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

because I refuse to treat humans like things.

Whatever human.

Child, adult, male, female, trans, black, white, killer, saint... whatever.

They are not things we can throw away.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
And ideally we wouldn't have to throw anyone away, but sometimes you must make a choice in limited time with limited information and limited resources and that choice will affect you and others, possibly drastically so.

And you might refuse to acknowledge that there is an ordering of your potential choices but the ordering will still be there and others might acknowledge it.

Ideally, people wouldn't have to think of this stuff, but the world can be ugly.

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

I don't undestand what you mean.

I'm sincere, I'm not lying.

In that exact situation with no other info to infer a difference in the probability of saving anyone, I would try to save all the human present, even with the risk of losing everyone.

Give me other info and my decision could change.

But note that this thought experiment is... well... just an imaginary experiment.

Abortion kills real humans.

Thus I'd prefer real objections.

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

I mean objections based on real cases, already happened.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
-not having the right to safe abortions just increases the number of unsafe and illegal abortions
-women are shamed for even considering an abortion and are told that "god will help" them. and guess what, they often die.
-rape victims should not be forced to carry a child they did not want

also, it is usually better to prioritize the mother's safety because they can, to put it bluntly, always have more kids

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

1) having the right to safe income and sustain for the kids, having welcoming communities that actively help the mothers and the right to affidate the kids to safe lovely institutions that grow them without judging the mothers decrease the abortions
2) God cannot help anyone alone, He need whole communities to grow a children even if he has a family around.
3) do yoy prefer the cheaper alternative: let them abort and forget them?

As for mother safety...

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

... I think that's a very complex, delicate and personal issue that a mother should decide with the help her physician.

But this is a relatively rare issue: most abortions do not occur to save the mothers' lifes.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
So until this magical promised land of yours comes true, what do you suggest those considering abortions do?

@grainloom @Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle prior to widespread access to abortions and other forms of birth control, the acceptable approach was infanticide.

Abortions are much cheaper and less messy. Let's stick with them.

Meat can have a human genome without being a person. It can even have the potential to become a person without being a person. Consider the root of every hair on your head, for instance.

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Magical lands?

Did I say unicorn?

I remember I talked about logic, politics, economy and culture.
The last three are human artifacts that depends on humans.

In those cases where abortions is considered for fear, my suggestion is to refuse the conditioning of the surrounding mainstream capitalistic culture and fight for your right to reproduce.
Consider giving the child for adoption... whatever.

But don't let the riches win: you and your kid are humans!

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
Have you seen what poor families with lots of kids go through?
And you haven't really answered my question.
Until all those conditions you've listed are met, what are women to do?

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Fight to have those conditions met?

Give their children to adoptions?

Do you really think that the pain of poverty can be fixed with abortion?
The problem is not the number of kids, it's the lack of proper state and community support. That could be improved with proper politics and taxation.

And BTW, while I can support my family now, I grow up in a poor family as we lost my father when I was 10yo. We survived thanks to our uncle till I got a job.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
Adoption only works if people can adopt and even that is not properly implemented everywhere.
Anyways, let me recap, correct me if I misunderstood:
what you suggest is that women who are in bad socioeconomic situations and are expecting a child that they (by their own admission) could not care for properly give birth regardless and either send the child off for adoption or raise them AND they should also fight to change society.

@Shamar @Wolf480pl @noelle
I think you are asking a bit too much.

Also, the case where the fetus is known to have serious genetic defects is imho not properly addressed. And Down is one of the better cases within that, at least the child doesn't die within hours after birth.

@grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

What is the difference between a child that die after an hour, a week or an year because of genetic defects and one who die because of an incident at the same age?

To me, there is no difference.

As #humans they both share the same #right to live as me and you.

Note that this is a pretty important step in an oppressive system: once you accept to kill a child you can accept a bit more to kill other non productive people, such poors, ills...

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> having the right to safe income and sustain for the kids, having welcoming communities that actively help ...

World ain't like that. People ain't like that. Not everybody wants to be a parent, y'know. Especially by accident, tragic or otherwise. It doesn't make them bad, it just means they have different needs and priorities.

> God cannot help anyone

Because there is none. Fictional characters don't help people. People help people. And people ain't all goody two shoes, most of us humans are pretty toxic bastards, get over it.

> do yoy prefer the cheaper alternative: let them abort and forget them?

Yes, let them abort if they want to. Nobody said anything about "forgetting them": there's a lot of shit associated with rape that needs helping with. It's a sensible alternative.

If the woman decides to an abortion, let her have it. It is not your place to tell anyone what to do with their bodies and parts of it.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle Also, mind you, abortion is not a fucking sport, it's an emergency measure, ALWAYS, no exception.
It's a traumatic and painful procedure, not even taking the social stigma that exists because of you and people like you.
Women turn to abortion only when all other options have been exhausted already.
When's the last time have you seen a woman getting pregnant and undergoing an abortion every goddamn Saturday just for the hell of it? I thought so.

@drequivalent @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

I wonder if you have read what I wrote.

I have said that #abortion is a #collective and #social #murder, that #oppresses the women instead of letting them fully express their right to reproduce.

It's the same oppression that objectify women, either as production tools, as marketing tools and as a pleasure tool.

And I said that we should fight such oppression.

Where is the stigma?

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle A woman also has a right to NOT reproduce. Capisce? And sometimes there is just no option to fully express the right to not reproduce other than abortion.

Now, what you're saying just makes no sense whatsoever. When and how access and right to abortion infringes on a woman's right to reproduce? Do you see anyone vouching for mandatory abortion? Strawman much?

@drequivalent @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

It's not actually mandated because it would break the particular narrative of #capitalism that let people call #oppression like #freedom.

Actually even in China, birth control did not #mandate female #abortions.

The result is the same.

If you don't give a woman the time, the support and the resources to grow a child, you force the abortion anyway.

In this US #democracy shows how similar it is to every other #totalitarianism.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle I believe this views are based on the fact that humans are very expensive to produce. It takes ~20 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to grow a self-sustaining and contributing individual in western countries. I suppose this could change some day, if we could create or copy human beings at will. This would also make murder less of a crime and more like a minor inconvenience.

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Honestly I think that, at some point, these internalisations of #oppressive #capitalism propaganda that make people accept #abortion instead of fighting for the right of women to reproduce and even to grow their children in a sane and supporting environment, will become a Darwinian selective pressure.

Personally I gain nothing from explaining people this (on the contrary!).

But consider the chance I'm right, if your #materialism is not a free ...

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle honestly, you're talking about capitalism propaganda if it was even a thing. Or if there was anything else beyond various forms of capitalism.

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

This is not #Capitalism:
https://www.nomadelfia.it/eng/ 😉

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

And #capitalism has #powerful #propaganda: we call it #marketing.

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle does it scale to 7 billion people? I doubt that.

As for your other reply, I consider myself a philosophical zombie. If I suddenly cease to exist and a perfect copy of me is placed instead, would anyone know a difference? Nope!

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> does it scale to 7 billion people? I doubt that.

I know you doubt that.

As for me, I simply don't know.
And honestly I find it surprising it's a community of more of 300 adults that lived this way for 80 years and yet 3 generations.
And guess why I find it surprising? Because I'm fed of capitalistic #propaganda just like you. I'm just aware of the it.

So maybe it would scale much better than #capitalism.
We simply do not know. 1/

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> I consider myself a philosophical zombie.

The #Oppression is strong with you.

The basic goal of any #totalitarism is to deprive #oppressed of the ability to even think objections to the oppressive assumptions, even when they face blatant logical contraddiction.

Here an example:

> If I suddenly cease to exist and a perfect copy of me is placed instead, would anyone know a difference? Nope!

Except, maybe.. you? 😉

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle but if another person looks like me, acts like me, feels like me, aren't they as much me as I am?

@newt
No, they aren't: you can't make an exact copy of a quantum system without destroying (altering) the original. Approximate copy — yes.
@Shamar

@amiloradovsky @Shamar is there a proof that consciousness is necessarily a quantum system?

@newt
No. Proofs may only be performed with a precisely defined notions, but consciousness isn't one of those now.
On the other hand, there is so-called Integrated Information Theory (#IIT), which aims to define it more or less rigorously.
@Shamar

@amiloradovsky @Shamar that's basically what I meant. Even if consciousness is quantum based, there's no way to inspect the quantum state, and I suppose there's no need because consciousness constantly changes. Myself today is different from yesterday. So it doesn't really matter.

@newt
My point was about copying: the only way to make an exact copy of something is to take the original…
And those minor differences matter: the evolution of such an unstable system must be very sensitive to the initial conditions (see the chaos/ergodic theory).
The change in time is not really a change of state (in a mechanical sense): e.g. pendulum is moving in time (swinging), although it's "state" stays the same, as long as nobody touches it.
@Shamar

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Let's suppose that I convince you that it is. Worse, let's suppose that you actually got conviced that you have no identity on yourself (something we know it's the only sure statement we can do from Descartes' "Cogito ergo sum", but... #marketing is #powerful).

Now let's suppose that I show you an exact SOFTWARE emulation of you. You yourself cannot see a difference.

And then I tell you "shutdown one of you"....

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

.. you chose to preserve the immortal software copy (because I don't tell you it's an emulation, I tell you it's your concience in a virtual reality) and kill yourself.

Then I stop the emulator, swap the data and proceed with the next undesired slave.

Whenever one of your friends or loved ones come here, I show them your emulation (that is unaware of having been swapped out meanwhile) and the simulator tell them to join your Eden.

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Sadly, this is not something that a particularly creative Sci-Fi author ideated for a new best seller.

This is something people make is trying to sell right now.

And guess what?

People would even pay to be killed this way! 😂

That's what I mean with #capitalism internalization: you could even sacrify your own #life, to preserve the #oppression for the sake of the #oppressors!

Great work! 😉

@Shamar @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle you're boring

@newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

... discovery of your own mind, but a deep environmental conditioning whose goal is to accept you are a thing to be used.

So to answer your question, when we will be able to "mass produce" slaves, slaves will be killed if defective (just like you accept to do with ill kids, elders or embryo).

They will be the dumb and quiet heirs of the poor of today and will serve as paria with no right the heirs of the riches of today.

Is it what you want?

@Shamar @newt @Wolf480pl @noelle
> just like you accept
within some extreme cases
no one is saying abortion shouldn't be controlled or there shouldn't be a cap for how old the embryo can be
or that it's good when someone has to choose it
but yeah, you wouldn't sacrifice someone to save someone else, i would. it would have to be a pretty dire situation but i would.
i have nothing else to add

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle this is a nonsense. Abortion and other forms of birth control are a technical progression, not capitalist per se. They simply replace the previously-widespread (and pre-capitalist) practice of infanticide with something tidier.

As for the rest, you're imposing a duty to reproduce, not protecting a right to. Reproductive choice is enhanced by technology, but more so by the end of notions like you or I deciding whether someone must bear a child

@lupine @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> As for the rest, you're imposing a duty to reproduce, not protecting a right to.

Read more carefully.

I'm not proposing to impose anything. There are several effective anticonceptions techniques out of there and even a couple of fully secure ones, if you don't want to reproduce.

I THINK that #killing a #human is NEVER a human behaviour.

But, I'm STATING that treating humans as things is not #freedom: it's the #oppression of #capitalism.

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle and none of them are 100% effective, even when used 100% properly (which is generally difficult). Even abstinence.

By denying abortion, you are imposing a duty to reproduce in the cases where earlier interventions fail.

Human meat with the potential to become a person has no right to life, and reproductive control is not capitalist oppression.

@lupine @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Well... if you include #Mary mother of #Jesus Christ in the compute, I will agree that abstinence used properly is not 100% effective. 😂

> #Human meat...

There's no such thing.

Or, if you prefer, you are human meat just like an embryo. Both of you have the same rights to life.
Your choice.

But so far, no argument provided has shown a real difference between an embryo and a #white #male like you.
Only difference is in current productivity.

@lupine @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

> reproductive control is not capitalist oppression

Sure, it's not.

But #abortion is not reproductive control, it's killing a #human.

Once you accept to kill one human, you can accept to kill others.

It's just matter of finding the proper #narrative and #propaganda.

Who's next?

#Poors? #Fat? #Black? #Trans? #Cyberpunk? #Christians? #Muslim? Low #IQ ones? High IQ ones?

Who?

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle fortunately, the idea that a fetus has moral equivalence is losing favour everywhere. This makes your nightmare scenarios less likely, as we can focus on the real distinctions between aggregates of human meat with moral standing, and those without.

Although we shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that bigotry needs an internally-consistent worldview to thrive. It does perfectly fine without one.

@lupine @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle

Actually it was Freire (if I remember correctly), that noticed how #oppressed who have fully internalized the #oppression cannot challenge it anymore...

Fine. I'm not your enemy.

I won't throw you away as you would do with other "human meats" when you will stop to produce and consume.

Others will, possibly with your own consent. But not me.

Good luck for your own #purchases! 😉

@Shamar @newt @grainloom @Wolf480pl @noelle sexual control is distinct from reproductive control, and many people do not have it. So yes, abstinence is not 100% effective. But it's by the by, since "oops" abortions have moral equivalence. There's no reason to avoid abortions in general.

I am definitely human meat, just like an embryo. Being human meat does not generate moral standing - that way lies absurdity, and as noted at the very start of this thread, is a modern invention