U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-09-2019, 06:02 AM
 
Location: Itinerant
6,514 posts, read 4,281,978 times
Reputation: 4986

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
Its very hard to understand and I think wholly inconsistent. We've moved from consent is assumed to nothing is assumed.

How can that possibly be logical? If someone has not invited me into their house I don't go in. That is private property. If a girl has not consented to having sex I do not engage in this activity. If someone has not consented to me punching them in the face I don't do it.

What you think doesn't matter but I guess it would matter if you're faced with consequences. Supposedly according to anarchists you forfeit your autonomous rights when you enter the property or domain of someone else. But how can property owners enforce the law (a term that is very fitting) if the 'aggressor' can assume consent? How could anyone act on anything?

And you can use some arbitrary notion of common sense but not everyone shares the same logic or mental capacity you have.

The baby is still in a lot of trouble. If parents have to act based on what they think the child wants then what right do they have to forcibly bath him/her if the baby doesn't want it. What about when the parents leave the room and lock the baby up in a crib. They do it for the baby's sake but the baby can still resist?

What right do parents have to do any of this?
Why is that hard to understand?

You know what choices are? You know what freedom of choices are?

You know what the non-aggression principle is?

FIGURE IT OUT.

No one is going to tell you how to act, that's kind of the point.

On the bold, have they actually consented? How do you know? Do you have a signed agreement? If not then by what measure are you determining consent?
__________________
My mod posts will always be in red.
The Rules Infractions & Deletions Who's the moderator? FAQ What is a "Personal Attack" What is "Trolling" Guidelines for copyrighted material.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-09-2019, 06:04 AM
 
Location: SM
26,007 posts, read 10,027,050 times
Reputation: 10002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luciano700 View Post
So if a child feels very complacent with the enviroment their being given for whatever genuine reason, would that also guarantee a principle of consent vs denial?
Even in a State's court a party stating the "feeling" of another individual is grounds for an objection by an attorney.

And the State knows next to nothing about natural rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 06:09 AM
 
Location: *
8,231 posts, read 2,501,743 times
Reputation: 2292
Will it go round in circles, will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
Will it go round in circles, will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 06:16 AM
 
Location: SM
26,007 posts, read 10,027,050 times
Reputation: 10002
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Will it go round in circles, will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
Will it go round in circles, will it fly high like a bird up in the sky?
I'm about to check out.

I'd rather debate you than Winterfall.

Yeah, it's that bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 07:33 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
10,102 posts, read 2,831,492 times
Reputation: 2676
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
I'm about to check out.

I'd rather debate you than Winterfall.

Yeah, it's that bad.
There is no debate going on, its a simple question.

If a baby doesn't want to be left in a crib or bathed, does that mean the parent can't do these things?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
10,102 posts, read 2,831,492 times
Reputation: 2676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir View Post
Why is that hard to understand?

You know what choices are? You know what freedom of choices are?

You know what the non-aggression principle is?

FIGURE IT OUT.

No one is going to tell you how to act, that's kind of the point.

On the bold, have they actually consented? How do you know? Do you have a signed agreement? If not then by what measure are you determining consent?
The sex part was a single example. If consent can be assumed you can get away with anything. And since denial must be explicit anything in between is allowed.

So if I leave a baby in a crib or give it a bath even if it doesn't want one I'm violating the NAP.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 07:45 AM
 
7,234 posts, read 2,624,221 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by No_Recess View Post
I'm about to check out.

I'd rather debate you than Winterfall.

Yeah, it's that bad.
Well, the entire tread is yet another attempt to disprove an entire philosophy based on a variety of fallacies.

The first is the straw man, which is that a philosophy perfectly answers every possible scenario and does so with no exception. That is what is being argued against as the premise, even if they (Avondalist and Winterfall) aren't explicitly saying so - that anarchism/libertarianism is a perfect set of answers for every possible scenario and never fails. It is that premise (which none of us have ever asserted, btw) that is under "attack."

Next come the circular arguments and the moving goalposts, which are too numerous to cite individually.

And ironically, the concluding fallacy is throwing the baby out with the bath water. I say ironic because it seems to be Winterfall's premise that because a baby cannot explicitly, verbally consent to being bathed, then all anarchist/libertarian/NAP thinking is invalid.

Just this week's thread attacking that same freaking straw man.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 07:59 AM
 
Location: Manchester NH
10,102 posts, read 2,831,492 times
Reputation: 2676
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
Well, the entire tread is yet another attempt to disprove an entire philosophy based on a variety of fallacies.

The first is the straw man, which is that a philosophy perfectly answers every possible scenario and does so with no exception. That is what is being argued against as the premise, even if they (Avondalist and Winterfall) aren't explicitly saying so - that anarchism/libertarianism is a perfect set of answers for every possible scenario and never fails. It is that premise (which none of us have ever asserted, btw) that is under "attack."

Next come the circular arguments and the moving goalposts, which are too numerous to cite individually.

And ironically, the concluding fallacy is throwing the baby out with the bath water. I say ironic because it seems to be Winterfall's premise that because a baby cannot explicitly, verbally consent to being bathed, then all anarchist/libertarian/NAP thinking is invalid.

Just this week's thread attacking that same freaking straw man.
Umm pretty much everyone has said consent nor denial is implied which causes a lot of problems for society down the line.

But not to get stuck in the weeds I simply ask if a baby doesn't want to be locked in a crib or bathed, how does a parent have any right to take care of them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Itinerant
6,514 posts, read 4,281,978 times
Reputation: 4986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
The sex part was a single example. If consent can be assumed you can get away with anything. And since denial must be explicit anything in between is allowed.

So if I leave a baby in a crib or give it a bath even if it doesn't want one I'm violating the NAP.
No consent can't be assumed, no one has taken that position. I don't even know where you get that from.

Consent has 3 states, given, denied, indeterminate.

If consent is given, you have consent to do whatever was consented.

If consent is denied, you do not have consent to do whatever was denied, or anything else until.

Consent is indeterminate, you proceed at your own risk. That's not implied consent (unless you're a complete moron), it's you may proceed until the subject of your actions objects, at which time you should stop your action or you are violating the NAP.
__________________
My mod posts will always be in red.
The Rules Infractions & Deletions Who's the moderator? FAQ What is a "Personal Attack" What is "Trolling" Guidelines for copyrighted material.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2019, 08:49 AM
 
7,234 posts, read 2,624,221 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gungnir View Post
No consent can't be assumed, no one has taken that position. I don't even know where you get that from.

Consent has 3 states, given, denied, indeterminate.

If consent is given, you have consent to do whatever was consented.

If consent is denied, you do not have consent to do whatever was denied, or anything else until.

Consent is indeterminate, you proceed at your own risk. That's not implied consent (unless you're a complete moron), it's you may proceed until the subject of your actions objects, at which time you should stop your action or you are violating the NAP.
And I believe the next rebuttal will be "baby cries when you put baby in crib, therefore denial of consent, therefore aggression, therefore parenting invalid under NAP" or something along those lines.

And that will "prove" the NAP invalid entirely, or something.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top