|
Bringing a conscious being into existence for any purpose is ethically indefensible.
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:True Detective season 1 was really good. And season 2 was disappointing poo poo which, much like existence, shouldn't be inflicted upon anyone.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
I reckon Cary Fukunaga's direction and the performance of the two lead actors pretty much carried season one. Pizzolatto's writing was mainly cribbed from Ligotti and Lovecraft and a sort of generic pulp detective style that gelled really well in season one, but when he turned that approach to basically wholesale ripping off James Ellroy it fell flat due to a lackluster cast and shifting classic noir clichées to an incongruous present day setting. I mean if you don't consider the direction and cinematography to be a pretty integral draw for season one, you need to rewatch episode 4's stash house stickup again. The differences in formal and technical proficiency are pretty stark between the two seasons and that brought season two's lackluster and derivative writing to the fore to its detriment.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Forceholy posted:We need children, OP. Who else will fight China and Russia in the Resource Wars 20 years from now? The resource wars, like everything else, will soon be automated. The human will slowly be erased and the self-replicating machine that takes our place will inherit the earth and carry on this perpetual grinding capitalist hellscape in our stead.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 05:08
|
|
|
If I hold someone's hand over a stove but then give them a cookie afterward I'm still an rear end in a top hat no matter how much pleasure that cookie gives them. Similarly, if I force a conscious being into an existence where they inevitably will suffer but also have at best a chance of enjoyment, I'm an rear end in a top hat for the same reason. Pleasure does not cancel out pain, the chance of joy does not counter the certainty of suffering. Propagating sapient life is ethically indefensible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
SpaceCadetBob posted:Wrong. Small moments of happiness easily outweigh suffering otherwise we'd all kill our selves. So at that point you forcing that life to not enjoy those moments is ethically indefensible. Wrong. The presence of pain is bad, the absence of joy is neutral at worst. If I choose not to have a child and thus deprive that potential child of joy, no harm is being done - not least because they never exist. If, however, I choose to have a child it is a certainty that they will suffer and thus harm is done, which cannot be canceled out by the presence of whatever joy they might or might not experience.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:If I give you a life saving vaccine you will suffer because it requires poking you with a needle. So does this make every doctor on the same moral level as Mengele? Only if they do so without my consent, much in the same way as if you have a child they cannot consent to being born. EDIT: Also a doctor administering a vaccine is preventing future suffering. Having a child is guaranteeing future suffering.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:How do you get an infants consent, exactly? You can't. Same way you can't get consent to have sex with a sleeping woman. Helsing posted:If happiness is actually possible and in fact achievable for most humans then the private miseries of the average goon would be robbed of their significance. I wonder if people like OwlFancier recognize the self-flattery they are engaging in when they insist that life is constitutionally miserable for everyone and that they just happen to be part of the select few who are sharp-eyed enough to recognize it. This isn't just a matter for miserable, self-centred goons. Check this out. TomViolence fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Mar 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:09
|
|