|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 9, 2018 13:54:38 GMT
Why would you or anyone else get to decide that you can arrest me or whatever? You don't think that a society needs basic rules for them to follow, to be able to get along together? Yes. Again, the idea is that kls responded to me with the old "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." The fact is that she's often fine with other people telling her what she has to accept/what she can do. If she weren't fine with that, then she'd basically be pro anarchy/against any basic rules to follow as you put it. Or in other words, "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." doesn't work as an objection unless we're talking to someone who is an anarchist.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 9, 2018 13:57:03 GMT
You don't think that a society needs basic rules for them to follow, to be able to get along together? Yes. Again, the idea is that kls responded to me with the old "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." The fact is that she's often fine with other people telling her what she has to accept/what she can do. If she weren't fine with that, then she'd basically be pro anarchy/against any basic rules to follow as you put it. Or in other words, "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." doesn't work as an objection unless we're talking to someone who is an anarchist. You're totally missing the point. I certainly will accept people telling me not to touch them if they don't want me to.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 9, 2018 13:58:20 GMT
Yes. Again, the idea is that kls responded to me with the old "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." The fact is that she's often fine with other people telling her what she has to accept/what she can do. If she weren't fine with that, then she'd basically be pro anarchy/against any basic rules to follow as you put it. Or in other words, "Who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can do/etc." doesn't work as an objection unless we're talking to someone who is an anarchist. You're totally missing the point. I certainly will accept people telling me not to touch them if they don't want me to. Then you shouldn't present an objection a la "who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can and can't do" You don't have a problem with that categorically. (That is, across the board.)
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 9, 2018 14:00:14 GMT
You're totally missing the point. I certainly will accept people telling me not to touch them if they don't want me to. Then you shouldn't present an objection a la "who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can and can't do" You don't have a problem with that categorically. (That is, across the board.) Are you still going to act as if you don't know the context of what we were talking about?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 9, 2018 15:56:59 GMT
Then you shouldn't present an objection a la "who are you to tell me what I have to accept/what I can and can't do" You don't have a problem with that categorically. (That is, across the board.) Are you still going to act as if you don't know the context of what we were talking about? What I'm talking about is the "who are you to say" objection in general.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 16, 2018 2:37:31 GMT
Are you still going to act as if you don't know the context of what we were talking about? What I'm talking about is the "who are you to say" objection in general. When it is bodily autonomy, it is that person. This is epitomised in the modern western societies' law on 'consent', both sexual and bodily autonomy in the sense of consenting to surgery, anaesthesia etc. That is the context, which doesn't necessarily have an 'overall' objection, just in the terms of personal sovereignty and bodily autonomy. It is recognised by the UN as a human right in this regard.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 12:42:25 GMT
What I'm talking about is the "who are you to say" objection in general. When it is bodily autonomy, it is that person. This is epitomised in the modern western societies' law on 'consent', both sexual and bodily autonomy in the sense of consenting to surgery, anaesthesia etc. That is the context, which doesn't necessarily have an 'overall' objection, just in the terms of personal sovereignty and bodily autonomy. It is recognised by the UN as a human right in this regard. How would any thing we could bring up not be about bodily autonomy, though? "Someone to say" what you can or can't do, in any context, and including where they're saying just how you can move about, including where they're saying they can imprison you for certain things, etc., is about bodily autonomy, no?
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Jul 16, 2018 13:14:17 GMT
It depends on the person and what is being judged.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 16, 2018 13:28:42 GMT
When it is bodily autonomy, it is that person. This is epitomised in the modern western societies' law on 'consent', both sexual and bodily autonomy in the sense of consenting to surgery, anaesthesia etc. That is the context, which doesn't necessarily have an 'overall' objection, just in the terms of personal sovereignty and bodily autonomy. It is recognised by the UN as a human right in this regard. How would any thing we could bring up not be about bodily autonomy, though? "Someone to say" what you can or can't do, in any context, and including where they're saying just how you can move about, including where they're saying they can imprison you for certain things, etc., is about bodily autonomy, no? Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with or be expected to care more about someone else's body autonomy who's interfering with mine than I do about my own? Why would someone violating another person take priority over the person being violated?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 13:35:30 GMT
How would any thing we could bring up not be about bodily autonomy, though? "Someone to say" what you can or can't do, in any context, and including where they're saying just how you can move about, including where they're saying they can imprison you for certain things, etc., is about bodily autonomy, no? Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with or be expected to care more about someone else's body autonomy who's interfering with mine than I do about my own? Why would someone violating another person take priority over the person being violated? Right, so when you're going through security at an airport, say, do you ask that question? ("Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with?")
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 16, 2018 13:36:42 GMT
Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with or be expected to care more about someone else's body autonomy who's interfering with mine than I do about my own? Why would someone violating another person take priority over the person being violated? Right, so when you're going through security at an airport, say, do you ask that question? ("Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with?") No, if it bothered me that much I wouldn't travel by air. I have a choice in that situation and I accept it for safety.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 13:45:42 GMT
Right, so when you're going through security at an airport, say, do you ask that question? ("Why do I have to accept my body autonomy being interfered with?") No, if it bothered me that much I wouldn't travel by air. I have a choice in that situation and I accept it for safety. Right. So in some situations you have no problem with your bodily autonomy being interferred with, right?
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 16, 2018 13:48:27 GMT
No, if it bothered me that much I wouldn't travel by air. I have a choice in that situation and I accept it for safety. Right. So in some situations you have no problem with your bodily autonomy being interferred with, right? If it's for a purpose. Like a pap smear or something. Not a fan of it, but it's necessary. Letting random people assault or touch me for no reason other than for them to get their jollies is another thing entirely. I wouldn't get to be making a decision about that.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 13:49:46 GMT
Right. So in some situations you have no problem with your bodily autonomy being interferred with, right? If it's for a purpose. Like a pap smear or something. Not a fan of it, but it's necessary. Letting random people assault or touch me for no reason other than for them to get their jollies is another thing entirely. How do we determine whether something is for a purpose or not?
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 16, 2018 13:54:31 GMT
If it's for a purpose. Like a pap smear or something. Not a fan of it, but it's necessary. Letting random people assault or touch me for no reason other than for them to get their jollies is another thing entirely. How do we determine whether something is for a purpose or not? I added a bit after you quoted. Who decides about the purpose? I'll make the decision based on if I agree with the reason/possible benefit or not. I'll take the pap smear because I'll get piece of mind if all is well or a better chance of a problem being caught early and being able to take care of it if not.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 13:58:36 GMT
How do we determine whether something is for a purpose or not? I added a bit after you quoted. Who decides about the purpose? I'll make the decision based on if I agree with the reason/possible benefit or not. I'll take the pap smear because I'll get piece of mind if all is well or a better chance of a problem being caught early and being able to take care of it if not. So basically this is just coming down to whether you like something, or at least think it's a good idea re its upshots/consequences or not. If you don't, then you trot out the "who are you to determine . . . " objection. If you do, then you don't need to ask who anyone is to determine anything about your bodily autonomy. You're fine with whoever it is determining it.
|
|
Lugh
Sophomore
@dcu
Posts: 848
Likes: 77
|
Post by Lugh on Jul 16, 2018 13:59:17 GMT
Is it wrong to judge the behaviour of people in non-modern western societies by standards of modern western societies? My opinion: It's ok to judge them, if their country signed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and if their society violates them. However, in the past, there was no Universal Declaration of Human Rights. So judging them is more difficult. But some people did it anyway. Nuremberg trials anyone? who cares about the law? The law is completely irrelevant, there's no moral obligation for you to obey the law.
|
|
|
Post by kls on Jul 16, 2018 13:59:51 GMT
I added a bit after you quoted. Who decides about the purpose? I'll make the decision based on if I agree with the reason/possible benefit or not. I'll take the pap smear because I'll get piece of mind if all is well or a better chance of a problem being caught early and being able to take care of it if not. So basically this is just coming down to whether you like something, or at least think it's a good idea re its upshots/consequences or not. If you don't, then you trot out the "who are you to determine . . . " objection. If you do, then you don't need to ask who anyone is to determine anything about your bodily autonomy. You're fine with whoever it is determining it. I insist on making the choice for my own body.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jul 16, 2018 14:06:51 GMT
The law is completely irrelevant, there's no moral obligation for you to obey the law. Because ...
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jul 16, 2018 14:19:52 GMT
So basically this is just coming down to whether you like something, or at least think it's a good idea re its upshots/consequences or not. If you don't, then you trot out the "who are you to determine . . . " objection. If you do, then you don't need to ask who anyone is to determine anything about your bodily autonomy. You're fine with whoever it is determining it. I insist on making the choice for my own body. So you do insist on making the choice for your own body when it comes to going through airport security? You don't feel like going through all of that on a particular day, or you don't want to be patted down or whatever, and you say, "I insist on making the choice for my own body, and I'm not choosing for you to do this to me today. Who are you to tell me what I can and can't do with my own body? I'm not going through this security rigamarole, and I'm walking back to my gate and getting on my plane whenever I feel like getting on my plane."
|
|