There is a very real problem in America today. People are starting to mistake feeling for thinking, and it is a part of a controversy burning up the internet today. There was some millennial science fiction writer who created an analogy about abortion that most liberals are treating like the best philosophical argument ever. It goes like this: you have several hundred fertilized embryos, as you would in a fertility clinic, and one baby in a burning building. You can only save the embryos or the baby. The conclusion is that obviously you would save the baby, ergo, the embryos aren't human; thus, no one really thinks life begins at conception.
There are several things wrong with this analogy. First, the people who think life begins at conception aren't also people who think it's fine to create frozen embryos by the hundred. Being Halloween, Estase would refer the reader to the movie or book Frankenstein. Second, it's an artificial dichotomy when you suggest that only the embryos or the baby can be saved. Logically speaking, the argument would be just as confusing if one substituted an eighty-nine year old man for the embryos; or a cancer patient for the embryos; or a convicted murderer for the embryos. The problem is that all these substitutes for the embryos are obviously human--all the same, you could make perfectly reasonable arguments for why they shouldn't be saved in favor of the baby. So this argument basically comes down to emotion. A person feels a baby can feel pain. A person feels a baby counts as a human being. Any philosopher who evaluates arguments on feelings alone should move to a field like womens' studies.
There is a lesson learned from this other than that science fiction writers don't make good philosophers. If this gentleman was the only person who mistook feeling for thinking, we would have an entirely different world. Contemporary political arguments have the unerring tendency to be based on emotion, and not logic. The common ingredient for Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the Alt-Right is anger. Anger is not conducive to compromise. Anger is not conducive to discussion. Anger is not helpful in reaching mutually beneficial arrangements. Estase thinks every presidential election from 2008 on was an emotive decision. Slogans like "Hope and Change" and "Make America Great Again" are emotional appeals, not logical ones. It is very discouraging that people have spent the last week debating whether or not they feel embryos are people. No better example exists of how much America feels the lack of a philosophical spirit in its public life.
There are several things wrong with this analogy. First, the people who think life begins at conception aren't also people who think it's fine to create frozen embryos by the hundred. Being Halloween, Estase would refer the reader to the movie or book Frankenstein. Second, it's an artificial dichotomy when you suggest that only the embryos or the baby can be saved. Logically speaking, the argument would be just as confusing if one substituted an eighty-nine year old man for the embryos; or a cancer patient for the embryos; or a convicted murderer for the embryos. The problem is that all these substitutes for the embryos are obviously human--all the same, you could make perfectly reasonable arguments for why they shouldn't be saved in favor of the baby. So this argument basically comes down to emotion. A person feels a baby can feel pain. A person feels a baby counts as a human being. Any philosopher who evaluates arguments on feelings alone should move to a field like womens' studies.
There is a lesson learned from this other than that science fiction writers don't make good philosophers. If this gentleman was the only person who mistook feeling for thinking, we would have an entirely different world. Contemporary political arguments have the unerring tendency to be based on emotion, and not logic. The common ingredient for Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the Alt-Right is anger. Anger is not conducive to compromise. Anger is not conducive to discussion. Anger is not helpful in reaching mutually beneficial arrangements. Estase thinks every presidential election from 2008 on was an emotive decision. Slogans like "Hope and Change" and "Make America Great Again" are emotional appeals, not logical ones. It is very discouraging that people have spent the last week debating whether or not they feel embryos are people. No better example exists of how much America feels the lack of a philosophical spirit in its public life.
No comments:
Post a Comment