Search results

A few points: - Many individuals with Down Syndrome won't have the capacity to determine the things you have mentioned. However, there are high functioning cases that exist with IQs over 70 (and into the low 80's) who will have better reflective capacity, though still limited of course. They...

Sure thing. Even our most institutionalised forms of philosophy/morality (religions probably) are prone to change with the developing views of society. I'm not much of a student of religion but at face value the various major schisms that have occured seem to reflect the intellectual climate...

Hey, thanks for the lengthy reply. I would tend to agree with your contextual approach to understanding the concept of 'humanity'. However, I would shy away from statements like "can easily be proved wrong in the future" because, on the relativist/contextualist account of a concept like...

Random question: 'humanity' is often thrown around as something which is essential or unassailable. Mightn't it be possible to change/redefine what it means to be human, or are some aspects of 'humanity' vital / not up for debate?

Also: I'm fairly sure that allowances are made if disclosure to the parents is likely to result in significant physical/social/psychological harm to the woman in question. I am unsure how the likelihood of such harm is assessed, however. In a lot of states in the US you can obtain a judicial...

Life would be easier if things were that simple, but the law tends to dictate otherwise. An extract from a short publication called consent to medical treatment by young people: "At common law, the position is this. Because the young woman is under 18 years of age (and therefore a minor) she...

Cheers mate, I too have enjoyed our discussions. It's good to have people about who are willing to engage with issues in depth.

Something I thought I should point out is that you shouldn't necessarily view science and philosophy as entirely separate entities. The scientific method is essentially a philosophy in itself, much of which deals in epistemology (philosophy of knowledge) by recommending methods of acquiring...

Along with clinical psychology it may be worth looking into neuropsychology (which is way cool, in my opinion). I believe they offer masters level programs at MQ and USyd. What do they do?: 'Neuropsychologists assess the cognitive and behavioural consequences of brain damage acquired as a...

Haha, well at a bare minimum I'd suggest that you've misunderstood my post. The point is not that empiricism is a load of bunk. I'm a medical student - I depend a great deal on science and hope one day to contribute to it. I think that it is the best tool we have for gaining knowledge about our...

I geuss the assumption that I am making is that empiricism doesn't cut it when it comes to justifying the claims of mathematics and logic. A few reasons why I think this - (1) Much of the scientific method is based on mathematics and logic in the first place, (2) it is extremely difficult to...

You've actually conceeded too much to science in saying this. Science can certainly make a very strong case that certain patterns of neurophysiological activity cause emotion. However, thus far no scientist has managed to explain why a given neurophysiological state causes a given sensory...

Before you bash the philosophical method of justifying beliefs too much think about where the scientific method comes from. The scientific method itself is not an object which can be empirically verified. As far as I can tell philosophy is the best forum for the justification of mathematics...

In such a case it seems that there is neither rhyme nor reason to god's preferences - they simply are what they are and we just accept them. This seems fairly unsatisfying to me. However, there still seems to be a problem to me (let me know if I am getting too pedantic here). If god's...

My first thought.

True, but that's not what I am arguing. What I have previously argued is that if there is to be objective moral truth, then it needs to have some origin beyond god. If this is the case then what is good will likely remain good in the absence of god. To further illustrate this point I'll repost...

Aye, that is correct :). On Ethics: A while back in the thread I was quite interested, and still am interested, to find out what you thought made moral/ethical claims true. Consider the proposition 'a cat is on my mat', call it CM. We might say that CM is true if and only if there is, in...

But if you really take the 'opposite world' hell to its full conclusion then existence is just as dependent on god as good, justice all that. So you might expect those entering hell to cease to exist all together. Also, as I've previously argued, if morality is to be non-relative then...

(1) Science only deals in theories. Saying that you can't use the big bang model to explain the origins of the universe 'because it is a theory' demonstrates a misunderstanding of science. Except for matters of logical consequence science aims only to provide the 'best explanation', not strict...

I guess at this point our underlying theory of moral psychology also becomes quite relevant. If one supports a Hobbes style psychological egoism/hedonism, which would hold that apparently moral actions are ultimately performed for self-interested or pleasure-seeking reasons, then it seems that...