Euthanasia and the Right to Die.

[worm]

To observe dependency requires the feelings gained via observation. Instinct is something that is felt in the same way. They both end up as merely thoughts in the head from which we draw conclusions.

[eFestivals]

What the fuck are you talking about now?

You can observe dependency. It's indisputable, much like the apple falling from a tree. You can't observe instinct. You have to make the theory up.

I repeat....

To observe dependency requires the feelings gained via observation. Instinct is something that is felt in the same way. They both end up as merely thoughts in the head from which we draw conclusions.

Which part of that it too much for you to understand?

[worm]

Which part of that it too much for you to understand?

Edited August 21, 2012 by worm

[eFestivals]

'Instinct is something that is felt in the same way.'

No it isn't. It's made up.

and so is the idea of psychology that says a person cannot wish to die without them having some psychological issue.

So why do you accept (or reject) one but not the other when they have identical basis?

[worm]

and so is the idea of psychology that says a person cannot wish to die without them having some psychological issue.

So why do you accept (or reject) one but not the other when they have identical basis?

[eFestivals]

I'm actually cool with the concept of instinct.

perhaps with the concept. Not with it having influence, not when that would undermine your power doctrine.

[worm]

perhaps with the concept. Not with it having influence, not when that would undermine your power doctrine.

[eFestivals]

Of course I think it has influence.

Maybe you're thinking of evolutionary psychology, in which instinct in a generation of individuals is seen as the result of learning in a former generation. In which case, instinct is the result of learning. I subscribe to this theory.

yep, you subscribe to the theory which gives that theory - and so you - power on the basis of guesses about evolution.

There's only one consistent theory to psychology, and that's never give up the power.

Unfortunately for psychology, it's a power it only has over the stupid.

Edited August 22, 2012 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

It very much sounds as tho he died with the help of others from what he asked his family to tweet, along with it happening just a short while after the court case was finished. If someone helped him, bless them for helping a man in need of help.

There was a piece on BBC Breakfast this morning where another man with locked-in syndrome had contacted the BBC and asked that they interview him for a different perspective. While this other guy had no intention of ending his own life, he fully sympathised with Tony and agreed with the case he was fighting for.

[Spindles]

I truly hope he found the peace and dignity he wanted and deserved. Nothing more to say.

[thetime]

I truly hope he found the peace and dignity he wanted and deserved. Nothing more to say.

[worm]

yep, you subscribe to the theory which gives that theory.

[worm]

Never mind psychobabble and legal rights, it looks like divine justice may have had a hand in this.

[eFestivals]

It would be idiotic to subscribe to an idea whose logic is flawed, such as the idea that instincts are eternal, given that they are constantly shaped throughout life.

But think what you will.

just because some might be shaped proves nothing of the rest - a rest that it's not possible to necessarily even know of.

Thought must be instinctual. How we think can change, but that we think does not. So there's at least one unchanging instinct.

[worm]

just because some might be shaped proves nothing of the rest - a rest that it's not possible to necessarily even know of.

Thought must be instinctual. How we think can change, but that we think does not. So there's at least one unchanging instinct.

[eFestivals]

Never mind psychobabble and legal rights, it looks like divine justice may have had a hand in this.

I dunno about that.

I've just heard on the radio that he died as a consequence of pneumonia, and while it might not be (I've no idea) the worst or most painful way to go, it's not the quick and easy release he wanted either.

I feel quite angry for how he's been treated by the law. We should enable the same possibilities for the disabled as the abled can freely enjoy - and we do, except for a moral issue like this, where the abled feel they have the right to moralise over the lives of the disabled in the way they wouldn't dream of doing for the abled.

Tony's disability was not to any part of his thought processes. Those thoughts should have been respected.

[eFestivals]

Why must it be instinctual? Why is it not the result of evolutionary processes?

It very probably is the result of evolutionary processes. Nothing of that stops it being instinctual.

Instincts are things a being is born with, not what their species has had since an amoeba.

Thought was very much learned through evolution.

Oh really? Then show me the proof that there is nothing comparable to what we know as thought within any single-celled organism.

You could be right, but you'd be right by guessing only.

[worm]

I've just heard on the radio that he died as a consequence of pneumonia, and while it might not be (I've no idea) the worst or most painful way to go, it's not the quick and easy release he wanted either.

[worm]

It very probably is the result of evolutionary processes. Nothing of that stops it being instinctual.

Instincts are things a being is born with, not what their species has had since an amoeba.

[eFestivals]

Not from an evolutionary perspective, which is what I stated from the outset. Do you ever listen?

Hmmmm .... I've just searched for "evolution" in this thread, and got zero results.

(the forums search engine won't have indexed your use here just yet, as the index is built periodically).

So perhaps I listened?

Beings have their instincts inherited through the behaviours of previous generations.

not necessarily.

Some have perhaps have been. Others might not have.

And in relation to cell based organisms, there is no observable sentience other than the will to replicate. There's a lot of psychology that bases itself on the will alone, looking soley at life and existence as pertaining to key drives (sex, food, shelter etc). Being an existentialist and humanist of sorts, I find this kind of logical premise reductive, not that I disagree with their being present. I just believe that sentience can be free of such drives by overcoming them. Self-sacrifice and such like.

care to tell me how a human is observed to be thinking?

So why do you think its evolutionary predecessors would show that they're thinking in a physical manner when we don't?

Observing actions is something entirely different.

I just believe that sentience can be free of such drives by overcoming them. Self-sacrifice and such like.

There's nothing like believing a bit of hoodoo at odds with the facts, eh?

While we can overcome them we certainly don't manage to overcome them some of the time.

And that aside, we'd firstly have to know what they all are before we can know that we're able to overcome them all.

[worm]

For you....

Of course I think it has influence.

Maybe you're thinking of evolutionary psychology, in which instinct in a generation of individuals is seen as the result of learning in a former generation. In which case, instinct is the result of learning. I subscribe to this theory.

[worm]

Some have perhaps have been. Others might not have.

[worm]

care to tell me how a human is observed to be thinking?

[worm]

And that aside, we'd firstly have to know what they all are before we can know that we're able to overcome them all.

[eFestivals]

For you....

Ah, OK.

So not "from the outset", and it's you moving the goals and making wrong assumptions about what I'm meaning.