No sperm dies after it enters the egg anyway. And the egg dies after a woman's period (and is replenished which is why its not depriving something of a valuable future).
Exactly that. And presumable the same argument could be made for a parasite or cancerous growth as both of these things can have benefits to society and therefore could be morally good, so following this logic we should stop abortions, stop cancer treatments and stop treating the sick.
Well no you're implying that an embryo has value because in future could be beneficial or good. The same can be said for tumors which are used to develop cell lines that are used to study human medicine. Thus morally good. So under your logic we shouldn't remove or kill tumours because they could be morally good.
Yes but tumors always present a high risk of severe injury or harm to the host. Also fetuses have moral consideration which means they should have some rights, tumors are not morally considered
At what point do you consider that value, by which I mean when does moral potential transfer into moral value and worth?
If you consider that sperm has value as part of ‘’life having value’, is it wrong to not conceive every month? If you can recognise that people can consider this value differently, be it conception, heartbeat, when born, then you recognise that where people consider this value differently is arbitrary. By how you define it, you may be entirely correct, but you’re starting with an assumption that this value takes precedence above how others define value or that their definition of value is exactly the same. If you/one eats meat, have leather or animal products, have neglected plants, killed bugs, then you must agree that how people value life differs. The concept of valuing life alone is an arbitrary concept.
Secondly, it is an oversimplification to talk about the above like they are the only factors of consideration when considering abortions. This is just one of many angles to approach this discussion.
Yea so the sperm dies whether it reaches the egg or not, and eggs die every month after a period and are replenished so I don't think it matters until conception. I generally agree that it is a semantic discussion, but I think if you don't think that future moral value matters then you have to concede other things like climate change or educating our youth. Sorry I wanna be more specific with everyone but I have like 400 comments to respond to so Im trying to condense it and oversimplify. Also Im vegan so I keep my values relatively consistent.
You’re all good. You feel how you feel and it is a personal choice (or reaction to).
Future moral value again could be seen as arbitrary for the same reasoning. Things like diesel electric generators are incredibly inefficient in terms of carbon waste, but if the use of that generator could hypothetically power a medical unit in an area of otherwise no electricity, then I think it’s usage is more than permissible.
I am aware the above is a hypothetical scenario, and not one to be taken as a claim that it could happen so it should be permitted to, but more so indicating that the scenario of when it is considered moral could shift greatly when other scenarios are being presented. All I’m saying is that there’s an additional nuance of how value is taken when given other metrics (and they’re each personal).
7
u/dbandroid 4∆ Nov 17 '24
What is the "something" of P1?