(March 29, 2014 at 5:02 pm)bennyboy Wrote:(March 29, 2014 at 12:09 pm)rasetsu Wrote: You need to look up what the word "intrinsically" means because all your examples fail. These groups may have 'thought' they were intrinsically valuable to themselves, but that doesn't mean they were.Hair: "Stop splitting me! The preposition 'to' is often used to express the opinions of a person or group of people!"
Quote:However, humans, by virtue of a shared biology which is interdependent on itself, are intrinsically special to other humans.Apparently not, since the nazis murdered millions of Jews, and since Europeans enslaved millions of Africans, treating them much like. . . cattle.
Quote:It wasn't an appeal to authority or a meta comment, dumbass, it was pointing out that you were being intellectually dishonest.Another way of saying, "You stubbornly refuse to disagree with my position." Here, I'll help you: replace "real" with "objective." When you keep talking about things being intrinsically special, this cannot include subjective or arbitrary evaluations of worth.
At best, you can say that common evalutions are rooted in instinct. However, so are the desire to rape, the instinct to murder and maim, tendencies toward selfishness, shortsighted misuse of resources, and every other thing we consider bad or wrong about humanity. This is still not a good basis on which to form a moral code.
Quote:We aren't special to ourselves as a species as a case of special privilege; we are special to ourselves because of the way biological evolution works.I think you're going to have to explain what "special" means to you, and in what sense our evalutions of people vs. animals are non-arbitrary.
Goodwin's Law.
Congrats Raetsu! BennyBoy has just forfeited a rational debate, and gone straight to Hitler!
