So why would you expect your father to leave you a "Dollar" based inheritance?
You are such a detective.
So why would you expect your father to leave you a "Dollar" based inheritance?
You are such a detective.
And just to be clear here, are we still talking of 7 year old dying from cancer, where being aborted would prevent years of pain?
Because such cases are rare, and you cant reasonably claim that 7 year old is lucky to be born so he can suffer for years and die from cancer at age 7.
that 7 year old on his own probably has more unrealized wishes than realized wishes. Merely having a wish isnt a positive for anyone. In fact, having a wish and it being unrealized is worse than not having a wish in the first place.
A and B aren't absolutely true, but they are necessary proxies given that we don't have a better way to measure wants.
But this rests on unproved assumption that your current way of measuring wants is good. A is terribly inconsistent, where B is likely to be false. So your standard of measurement rests on inconsistent (A) and likely to be false (B).
In other words, measuring using that standard has more potential for mistake than correct answer.
But they are not at risk of being aborted and generally have less to gain from abortion than someone has to lose by being aborted.
And in that case, we again end up with weighing of wants, because you are making decision based on wants.
P1. Majority of people (including future unborn) want abortion to be legal
P2. Wants are measured by mere majority to determine best wants (When A and B from previous is conceded, and C is taken as true)
C. Abortion being legal is best want
Now, when it comes to unborn, we only consider future wants. Unborn doesnt have current wants. Unborn has no "desire to live" in any sense of that word.
So when we consider future wants of majority of unborn, and wants of current majority of born, they want abortion to be legal.
Your original argument was based on wants where wants of people who are majority outweigh wants of people who are minority.
But if you want to at the same time create another standard that excludes wants of majority any time when minority suffers from it more than majority:
"But they are not at risk of being aborted"
P1. Minority always suffers when wants of majority prevail over wants of minority
P2. Saying that wants of most people who want to live matters more than wants of people who dont is wants of majority prevailing over wants of minority
C. Minority suffers if wants of most people who want to live matters more than wants of people who dont.
So saying that minority is at risk of wants of majority (abortion) coming true while at the same time saying wants of majority should prevail over minority is a logically impossible standard to hold.
"and generally have less to gain from abortion than someone has to lose by being aborted"
If you assume equality of wants, then gains are higher for legal abortion. Greater number of people achieve their want if abortion is legal. Even majority of aborted unborn achieve their future wish of abortion being legal, as well as negative wishes and prevent unfulfilled wishes.
Further, unborn has a lot to lose by being born, when we assume negative wants and unfulfilled wants. While aborted fetus has no wants and thus loses no wants from abortion, his future born self would lose a lot of wants by being born, in form of negative wants and unfulfilled wants. Negative wants are wants for something not to happen, but it happens. So they act as negative. And unfulfilled wants are wants for something to happen, but it doesnt. Now, if you base your argument on achieving wishes, then having a wish and failing to achieve it is a negative, where not having a wish is neutral.
So under equality of wants, your best argument would be:
"Unborn's number of lost wants > Born person's number of realized wants"
But unborn doesnt have wants. No more wants are lost by aborting a fetus than are lost by not having sex to make it in the first place.
So for this reason, you can only logically consider future wants of unborn, not current wants.
But no number comparison there is possible, because you cant possibly account for:
A. Realized wishes (negative and positive)
B. Unrealized wishes (negative and positive)
C. Lack of wishes
While abortion being legal, in some countries, fulfills millions of wishes, not just of abortion being legal but also women having control over their body and not having to be forced to pregnancy, aborted fetus has no realized wishes, but also has no unrealized wishes, and also has no wishes, and also, number of aborted fetuses are far lower in number compared to number of people who want abortion legal, and who benefit from abortions in terms of other wishes being realized.
You realistically cant count wishes to see what fulfills more wishes and prevents more unrealized wishes, in case of aborted fetuses.
However, we know this:
Aborting a fetus prevents all its unrealized wishes. So it effectively prevents any negative life of fetus, while fulfilling wants of actual born people and improving their life.
Its literally food coming into your mouth by itself so you can eat it.
God provides for everyone.
I like how you assumed a bad therapy provider was a he.
No, it was a she.
And she wanted to blackmail me to continue therapy by threatening with injections if I refuse.
But I saw through her. I logically defeated the abusive therapy provider.
And the therapy she was supposed to provide was for speech disorder, but she blackmailed me that if I dont quit video games, she will send me on injections. However, I quit therapy, because I dont want to enable abusive people to have jobs or success in life.
A lot more who take significant steps every day to not die
So your argument essentially rests on 3 parts:
A. Actions reflect wants
B. All wants are equal in value (Equal or close to equal is necessary to conclude that majority of wishes outweigh minority by value)
C. Wants are to be respected
B obviously cannot be proved by any means. We could at best say desire to live outweighs desire to die in most people, so desire to live is above 50%. However, this means virtually nothing in case of value of desire. A 51% to 49% is about as close to 1 to 1 ratio, where 99% to 1% is ratio of almost 100 to 1. And this is before we even establish any number values. Someone having 10000 desire to die and 1 desire to live isnt really same value as someone having 100 desire to live and 99 desire to die.
Now, A is problematic too. Actions dont reflect wants, at least not in direct sense of "action = want".
Most people shorten their lifespan by smoking, drinking lots of alcohol, speeding, eating unhealthy, living a bad lifestyle...ect.
this doesnt mean most people want to shorten their lifespan. Person who smokes doesnt smoke to shorten his lifespan, even if that is result. So person in this case choosing to reduce his lifespan by smoking cannot be said to have desire to have lower lifespan. Person has desire for cigarette, and shortening lifespan is just unintentional undesired but unavoidable part.
Likewise, most people can be persuaded to do bad things. Most people can be persuaded to kill each other in war. this doesnt mean people have desire to kill each other, or have desire for war, but a combination of other goals achieves those results.
So just because most people choose not to kill themselves, it doesnt mean they want to live. Because there are other goals at play. Person who commits suicide wouldnt merely end that person's life, but ruin life of entire family that person is part of, and cause devastating long term effects on them. Or person has someone depending on a person, and suicide would harm others. So it is not merely "desire to live" at play, and "desiring to live or desiring to not live" is a false dichotomy because person can desire neither, but desire something else, and living just being part of it, not desire of itself.
And finally, C. Even if A and B were granted to somehow say most people want to live, and that such wants outweigh wants to die, the problem with C is that it doesnt work to support ban on abortion. Most people support abortion being legal. So by same logic, the very aborted fetus would, if not aborted, likely support abortion being legal.
I ate a bug in my sleep last night
So there is such thing as a free meal.
The fact a guy like you was licensed and continually gave therapy to mentally fragile children is INSANElY bad screening.
Actually, that is not any big surprise or even surprise. When I was a kid and was in therapy, person who provided therapy tried to blackmail me and threatened to subject me to injections if I reject therapy.
So I rejected therapy because I concluded person providing it was clearly insane, and submitting to blackmail would only make blackmail work and enable more blackmail.
After a lot of thinking, I realized that with my genes and raised in most optimal environment, my offspring could easily be next Guru Nanak - Ultimate spiritual leader of the world who will bring balance to the force and establish one world government that combines science, religion and magic to govern the world for eternity.
But we are not quite there yet. You see, in order to produce an offspring, a reproduction must happen.
Now, I dont belong to a species which is self-fertile. I am not hermaphroditic.
I also am not born intersex, so I dont possess both male and female reproductive organs to enable self-reproduction like some intersex people can, maybe.
So, in order for me to reproduce, I need a female reproductive organ which I dont have.
Now, most women have female reproductive organs. So I logically need a woman until they develop artificial female reproductive organs which dont require woman and also which arent expensive.
So I need to connect with woman's female reproductive organ.
Now, this is a bit complicated, because slavery was abolished. I cannot buy a woman. Likewise, forced marriages were abolished too.
In today's time, what is required is woman's consent in order to connect to woman's female reproductive organ.
Now, consent basically means willing agreement, so in simple terms, woman must also want it.
the problem which I face is that most women dont want it.
So the equation goes like this:
(A) to reproduce) = (B) to connect to woman's female reproductive organ
(B) to connect to woman's reproductive organ = (C) woman's consent present
So if C in equation fails, B fails too by law of identity, and then likewise A fails by law of identity as well.
In other words, entire of this logical dependency system is dependent on C, because law of identity connects A to C.
Now, if I was born as a girl, getting woman's consent would be easy because I would be a woman, and then equation would be different and start depending on man's consent, which is easy to get.
In fact, overwhelming majority of women of reproductive age are wanted by men.
true female incels are almost non-existent, as evident by countless messages I get from horny men on instagram who mistake me for a girl, yet almost no messages from girls who mistake me for a boy.
So if merely being mistaken for a girl gets me countless attention from men, yet same is not true for girls as girls dont give me countless attention when they know I am a boy, conclusion is that attention from men is much easier for women to obtain, and likewise probably connection to reproductive parts.
Now, I have over 145 IQ, so I should logically try to figure this out.
Now, if a woman doesnt want to connect with my reproductive parts, that can be changed in only one logical way, when we apply law of identity:
(A) Connecting to my reproductive parts = (B) Achieving a different desirable goal
(B) Achieving a different desirable goal = (C) Woman's consent becomes present
If B true, C true, and then A true because C = A.
In simple terms, by law of identity, woman might not want to connect to my reproductive parts, but if connecting to my reproductive parts leads to her getting some other thing she actually wants so much that even if it comes with connecting to my private parts, it still remains desirable, then a woman starts wanting to connect to my private parts.
In order words,
(A) Connecting to my private parts to achieve a different desirable goal = (B) Desirable
(C) Connecting to my private parts when C is part of A = (B) Desirable
So we have logically solved the equation.
If woman doesnt want to connect to my private parts by default, she starts wanting to connect to my private parts when doing so achieves a different want which she finds desirable.
In other words, I need to provide something a woman finds desirable in exchange for her connecting to my private parts.
Also, this equation must be true:
(A) Connecting to my private parts = (B) I provide something else a woman finds desirable
(Lack of A) Not connecting to my private parts = (lack of B) I dont provide something else a woman finds desirable
In other words, lack of A must come with lack of B and not with B.
If I provided desirable things to a woman without a condition that she connects to my private parts, she would have no logical reason to connect to my private parts.
But we cannot only think logically here, because women dont think logically.
Women think in terms of emotions, which are subject to a lot of change, and it is quite possible that Lack of A in some cases turns to A, when other desirable things are provided without condition.
In other words, we must account for 2 emotions: Uncertainty and feeling need to return a favor.
Uncertainty comes when desirable thing is provided now, but uncertain if it will be provided in future.
So in other words, I provide a woman with one desirable thing, and then I ask her to connect to her reproductive parts. She will probably be uncertain at that point, in simple terms, she will think "If I reject him, he might not provide more other desirable things to me."
Second emotion is feeling need to return a favor.
It works in a way of "He did something I wanted, so I will do something he wants."
It is sort of an unspoken trade agreement type of emotion, but not trade in a strict sense but more like feeling urge to do a trade in this form even when not logically having to.
Now, we have covered the basic principle.
(A) Wanting to connect to private parts = (B) Achieving some other desirable thing when connecting to private parts
So we have effectively solved the problem of consent by obtaining consent through trade.
Now, in other for trade of desirable things to happen, something desirable must be traded.
What do women find desirable?
Women find desirable:
Now, since I am an expert in logic, I know that adding two things produces a third thing of bigger greatness than any of individual two.
In other words, offering women only 1 of the 12 things on list of things they find desirable, would be of much smaller greatness than offering all 12.
So offering more of desirable things is a logical advantage in trade which increases possibility of standard for trade being met.
So we have solved all the basic problems here in theory.
If I was born a woman, I wouldnt need to solve all these logical problems, but would just provide my private parts to many men until one succeeds in reproduction.
But as a man, I face different standards due to gender inequality.
Generally, Muslim women do not consume alcohol
You have clearly never been to Bosnia.
You purport to have access to unlimited funds and investment capital.
No, I don't have infinite wealth. I have wealth which is currently sufficient to support me for next 40 years, and when gold and land skyrocket in value, also my wife and 5 sons.
So instead of being a skinflint, why don't your pay a surrogate rather than expect her to volunteer
Child needs a mother. I am not raising a child as a single parent. I need an obedient healthy woman who can give birth to more than 1 kids, and of course she will get rewarded for her efforts with plenty of chocolate. (She needs sugar so developing fetus in womb has access to sugar too, to possibly develop bigger brain).
Now, of course, my current wealth doesn't include inheritance from my dad. While my dad never gave me a single dollar, and never even hugged me, I am still legally his son. This means that I should get some inheritance from him, which will hopefully be a lot because he owes me like a million dollars by now for everything he did to me.
So, dad's inheritance plus current wealth, plus gold and land skyrocketing places me in a better position.
Of course, I always want more, because I want for my children to be rich. I don't want them suffering in poverty like I did when parents bought me cheapest smartphone.
No, my children need to live as rich people who will already have plenty of money once they turn 18.
Now, hopefully, more wealth will flow my way.
I don't want to have a job, because I don't want to be one of those parents who work all day and their kid gets raised by Tik Tok, or worse, television.
No, I need to be there for my son constantly.
So, it can't really be a payed woman, I need a female volunteer who will not only give birth, but also be there too for my son.
It needs to be a complete family, which is scientifically proved to be superior to single parent households.
Now, I can sense more money coming my way, which is good because money attracts women to me naturally.
Tho I probably shouldn't marry a woman who is too poor. I know poor people have worse nutrition, and as a result, less capable brains.
Ideally, I would marry an 18 year old woman who is a millionaire and has IQ of 160 and is expert in many fields of science, tho I understand I will probably have to settle for woman of average or maybe even lower than average IQ and lower than average total wealth.
Still, my goal in life is to reproduce to give humanity it's next spiritual leader.
For this, I need wealth and woman capable of reproduction.
Now, once I earn enough wealth and also inherit house and land and money, that should naturally attract women to me.
Of course, if my dad was competent, he would have at least left me 400 million dollars, and then my reproduction would be made a lot easier.
So for the record, I am currently in my 65th year.
You sound older.
Even among those wanting to die there's a lot of hesitation; the desire to live tends to be much stronger and people fight tooth and nail to not die.
there are also a lot of people who commit suicide. there are also a lot of people who say their life is horrible. So your argument just goes back to number values of wants, which you cannot realistically determine and also cannot deduce equal value.
Those are just numbers you made up though
All want value numbers are made up. What would you even logically deduce it from?
Also, almost all teaching must be done in form of questions. He must be asked questions and make his own conclusion based on questions which motivate thinking. I am not telling him what to think. I am teaching him to think and motivating him to think.
Remember sports
Yes, tho I mostly oppose almost all sports. I dont think running or riding a bicycle benefit anyone, really. It takes too much time which can be better used elsewhere. Also, bicycles lead to higher risk of accident. Now, doing a bit of workout from time to time is good enough.
Also, he logically needs to spend time in meditation, proper breathing, proper water intake, and preferably some time in nature. Forest naturally benefits human.
Also, he must have vegetarian diet. Meat eaters are lower in IQ and empathy, so I must logically exclude meat from his diet.
That is an insufficient parenting plan.
Yeah, I forgot, I also have to include bed time stories and intelligence boosting sounds, such as classical music.
My offspring also must never be poor. He must have plenty of toys, and expensive smartphone.
He needs to be rich from early age. He cannot be distracted by poverty.
He also needs to be on few natural mind boosting substances, such as caffeine. My parents gave me caffeine in form of coffee since age 5, and I do have maximally great brain so I naturally must assume caffeine isnt harmful for kids in small amount.
His diet needs to be most logically planned to ensure maximally great brain development which hopefully gifts humanity most optimal future spiritual leader.
He also needs to learn about value of sharing and caring for others.
I will raise my offspring using following rules:
I really hope my offspring will be a male. I am not a misogynist. I just know woman is statistically less likely to get in position of power.
I just need to find female of reproductive age who will volunteer to carry my seed.
Antinatalism is a mental poison.
Yeah, I plan to reproduce, because its obvious to me my offspring could be next Jesus or Guru Nanak.
Best Muslim post 2025
Inadvertently I would say it is Debby and Satan Lucy
I dont run this site. I dont have any moderator, developer or owner role. I also dont make the rules. Rules were made by vote of members.
Now, I post a lot, every day. But that isnt me running the site, its some members being sleepy. Literally, nothing prevents anyone to post as much as I do.
I understand not everyone can find time to post often, but really, 1 comment takes like 3 minutes to write. You can even have AI write it like Debby often does.
And I dont post only on this site, but also on modern day debate, as well as some social media. tho I abandoned a lot of my social media accounts because it became impossible to maintain them all, and I dont find much point to post once a month.
Right now, I use tik tok, youtube, discord, and this site. I abandoned Instagram, twitter, because those are boring. twitter has terrible user interface on phone, and instagram is just bunch of people sending each other dick pics, and I am tired of getting messages from horny men who mistake me for a girl.
If he looks like that, its great for him, but judging how he hates actual workout and prefers riding bicycle, I imagine a lot less muscles.
Why do poor people (those worth less than $3 million) even want to live?
I thank God every day for making me rich. thats so much better than being poor. No offense to poor people, but their social status is logically undesirable.
You were born in the year 1227 and are a legitimate vampire.
So our owner is eternal, and avoids sunlight just like I do.
Push-In Method: Use the handle of a spoon, a sturdy pen, or even a toothbrush handle to apply steady pressure and push the cork down into the wine.
Alright, this cannot work with bottle I bought. No amount of pressure can push it in. Its literally impossible.
Yes, that sounds like more of good advice.
I am young. this guy is very old. Average life expectancy favors me over him. Its bad news for him. Average life expectancy in UK is 81 years. this guy is probably over 70.