To preface this thread, I'd just like to make everyone aware that I haven't eaten anyone nor do I intend to, this is simply theoretical. Not that I'd mind it, always wondered what people taste like...
Anyhow, I have been a long-time advocate of the legalisation of cannibalism as a legitimate practice, but this seems to have some pretty bad repercussions in an environment with 'normal' people, so I thought I'd discuss it with you all. I acknowledge that there will be different perspectives and so I will have a hard time addressing all of their attitudes but I will try.
1: If we accept that there is nothing after death, then there is no individual to harm through this act (Therefore, theories which attempt to prevent harm are not able to contest it on these grounds).
2: If we consider the wider ramifications of cannibalism, there is very little/no damage to society or others, and as such democratic theories (i.e Utilitarianism) cannot decry it for its harm to relatives, etc.
3: If there is no murder (the individual died of natural causes/accidents, etc.) then there is no reason to object to the acquisition of the corpse
4: If the individual is consenting, what authority does anyone else have over how his/her choice of their corpse's use?
These are only a few points to get the ball rolling, I'm relatively skeptical about this myself but I feel that it ought to be discussed. Let us see what may be seen.
Anyhow, I have been a long-time advocate of the legalisation of cannibalism as a legitimate practice, but this seems to have some pretty bad repercussions in an environment with 'normal' people, so I thought I'd discuss it with you all. I acknowledge that there will be different perspectives and so I will have a hard time addressing all of their attitudes but I will try.
1: If we accept that there is nothing after death, then there is no individual to harm through this act (Therefore, theories which attempt to prevent harm are not able to contest it on these grounds).
2: If we consider the wider ramifications of cannibalism, there is very little/no damage to society or others, and as such democratic theories (i.e Utilitarianism) cannot decry it for its harm to relatives, etc.
3: If there is no murder (the individual died of natural causes/accidents, etc.) then there is no reason to object to the acquisition of the corpse
4: If the individual is consenting, what authority does anyone else have over how his/her choice of their corpse's use?
These are only a few points to get the ball rolling, I'm relatively skeptical about this myself but I feel that it ought to be discussed. Let us see what may be seen.
Religion is an attempt to answer the philosophical questions of the unphilosophical man.
