Not entirely the same thought experiment. The trolley thought experiment has numerous functions and it does not have any wrong answers. Some use it as psychology examples, moral and political. The OP is specifically about logical consistency.
I don't mind morality by emotional appeal. In fact...
So, tell me what do we gain or lose from removing a fetus that's less than 22 weeks old if it's going to die regardless of what we do? I would also like you to consider the procedure itself, not just from the fetuses perspective, but also from the people administering the abortion and the female...
Yeah, and he's still relaying what other people saw, so it's hearsay. A double whammy of hearsay is that no one knows who the the author is in the Bible for Paul. Coolz Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews - Wikipedia
Yes, eye witness testimony does not equal the truth. Phew :p Equally...
First, by definition, it is hearsay, because Paul is relaying what the witnesses saw. Second, historians are writing what people claim to have happened. I don't think many historians will say the resurrection did happen, some would rather paraphrase what the claims are. Third, none of this is...
If it's true that a leech cannot survive without you as a host and this is considered, then no it's not killing. How could it be?
What I'm saying is, the mother needs to choose the procedure that's safest for her if she wants an abortion. Why would she put her life on the line when she wants to...
My position is three words(4 if you count the contraction as 2). It’s the most intellectually honest position and it’s one you’d never admit, because of presuppositions you hold. I don’t think you could guess it either.
Nope.
Nope.
Special pleading.
Nope.
You just did what I said was fallacious in the last post Argument from Ignorance
It's like you can't not be irrational. I hope anyone reading this notices what religion can do. Anyway, I'm done with you. Good day ;)
Assuming something caused the universe, why does it have to be a being?
For analogy, I’m granting you someone actually died, however, you need to show it was a person that murdered him/her and they did it on purpose. Remember, appealing to ignorance is fallacious.
So far, you’ve given flawed analogies, argument from beauty, argument from complexity and they’re all variation from arguments for ID.
These theories, at best, display an appearance of design. However, this appearance usually fails by itself because many things have been thought designed but...
There’s no scientific evidence. People who believe this is so are also more likely to believe in breatharianism, ultrasonic pest repellers, drinking one’s own urine to cure cancer, holy water cures, voodoo, you name it.
So, ummm, the house analogy is flawed. Rather than me explain this and you not understand, try to think why this analogy fails. What’s the difference between a house and the universe/planet/whatever? I did actually explain it in post 263. Eh, I bet you won’t get it, but we’ll see. Maybe you’ll...
If you wanted to help people, at least mental health related, the best thing you could do is urge them to go to a therapist or mental health institution.