/ourguy/ Franco's got a new philosophy web series up...

/thread

Watch the video boys.

The ladys argument is more confusing than Hegel's phenomenology of spirit.

>>saged the thread
>posted a pic

He's pretty funny in silly comedies. Other than that, 127 Hours, I guess, which isn't anything special. Hope The Deuce is good, though. Love everything David Simon has done so far.

I'd rather watch a video with good arguments.

Retroactive moral status is a perverse line of thought.

Mods, do your fucking job.

Sage goes in every field.

Get a look at this brainwashed goy.

He probably hasn't even read Mein Kampf

def not our guy

I am so over this fucking hack.

So let me see if I understood her correctly.
The moral status of a fetus is determined by what will eventually happen to it which can only be known in hindsight.

Seems like her view says there's nothing immoral with killing a fetus against the mother's will. Obviously, striking the mother would be immoral because it's assult against her but if you kill the fetus in the process there's nothing added. Feeding the woman something to kill the fetus, without her knowledge, seems not to present a moral issue.

It doesn't, though

is you being over him going to stop him from adapting Blood Meridian?

do you even own a gun?

I don't think he deserves to be killed. He just needs to have reasonable limits set on him. Possibly beaten into him in order to set them.

What the fuck was she even saying? She literally contradicted herself about 5 times. Her view point made no God damn sense.

his brother is hot

youtube.com/watch?v=9MwT_10russ

How did she contradict herself

How about we promote someone who actually seriously discusses philosophy rather than a pseud who's trying to portray himself as a deep thinking artist?

youtube.com/channel/UCEtxsMx4qsoitFwjBdLU_gA

So why does having conscious experiences magically endow something with moral status?

>"I'm not saying that the mother decided whether the fetus had moral status"
>"If the mother decided to have an abortion than that fetus loses morale status because it was aborted and therefore had no future."

He is good, but it puts me off how much he resembles Jason Unruhe.

remember when he tried to fuck that 14 year old on instagram?

shut up, my body my choice

franco.. easy on the fetuses

You can sage threads while posting images. moot fixed that years ago

>philosophy
>woman
im not going to bother

Praise kek! o/ o/

>liberal woman espousing """""philosophy"""""
Let me guess: the philosophy she's talking about just happens to fit very neatly within the bounds of the democratic party platform?

Really isn't possible to defend abortion unless you're a utilitarian, and if you're a utilitarian you might as well be a Nazi or a Commie.

>""""Professor"""" Liz Harman

princeton.edu/~eharman/

This is why I no longer give a fuck if someone went to Harvard or Princeton or dropped out of school entirely

It's a fucking joke that best education in the world = being taught by cunts like this.

so this is the power of academia...

But seriously read a few of her papers

wowe so cool

>when you were an early stage fetus you had value but when you abort a fetus it retroactively becomes a meaningless non-being

We're witnessing the final death throes of Liberalism

Holy shit this is infuriating.
>often times we know, we know that if a woman wants an abortion and she has access to one then that fetus is going to die
...what the fuck goes on in this woman's mind? What if somebody, oh I don't know, STOPS her from getting an abortion? Or what if it's made illegal? Or the doctor refuses?

Holy shit this bitch needs a clap around the head. But maybe even more than that those fucking cucks talking to her need some as well. Not once do they question or critique her views, they just sit there agreeing with it all. Wasn't that supposed to be a discussion?

holy shit i get better philosophy from my moms facebook memes

>whether an early foetus has moral value is determined by whether it has a future
>foetuses that we don't kill have moral value because we didn't kill them so they have a future
>foetuses that we do kill have no moral status because we did kill them so they have no future
Am I strawmanning her argument or is this what she's actually saying?

This seems like a frankensteining together of a number of different arguments for abortion; we did abortion last year in my philosophy course as part of ethics and she'd have been laughed out of the leaf tire theatre if she'd tried this argument.

Is this the power of American education??

Unless I'm also completely misreading her argument you're not strawmanning it; that's literally what she believes.

>Is this the power of American education??
It would seem so. Most Western education systems are essentially leftist brainwashing centres, and unfortunately the US seems to be fairing particularly badly. However I wouldn't necessarily say that this is purely the result of the education system. It's a result of post-modern cultural marxist theory being pushed to the nth degree - all values and norms subverted, anything is justified. Nietzsche was right, god is dead; this is simply one of the results.

She's literally promoting killing babies because the mere intention to kill them means they aren't worthy of any moral status.

Progressivism is a cancer.

>it's only human if we allow it to be human
>we can kill it because it hasnt had experiences.

Wat.

I am of the camp that women can do whatever the fuck they want with their bodies. Kill your baby if you're so inclined to, but relieving yourself or the moral ambiguity, and I use that term lightly, is your burden to carry.

>I am of the camp that women can do whatever the fuck they want with their bodies
Aside from the fact that this has led to nothing but shit, what about the baby's body?

My course was leftist as fuck and all the lecturers supported abortion, but they would never have made an argument for it as retarded as this. I genuinely don't know how this woman got to the position she's in unless she was given some "help" getting there by people she knew.

What she's arguing is a kind of flip of the anti-abortion argument that killing is wrong when the foetus has a future of potential fulfillment, where she's retroactively saying that because they're dead it's okay to kill them which patently retarded. It's so obvious that abortion is the intervention that deprives them of a meaningful future so how can it be justified on the grounds of their having no future

Fuck I'm so angry, not even at the position she's holding even though I disagree but that this kind of braindead fucking moron gets to a position of power as a lecturer in philosophy without even the slightest critical thinking skills.

The universities will not exist in twenty years unless these people are purged.

(((Elizabeth Harman)))

Gee, I wonder how she got that job.

Okay, but doesn't a woman CHOOSE to disallow a fetus a future? That's another agent applying her will unto the fetus, which at the moment before the abortion had a high chance of having a future, and choosing to disallow it a future? I don't think the pack of experience and consciousness negates the moral choice the mother is making. If embers are next to a dry bush and you snuff them out you've prevented a fire but the embers were still there to burn. And aren't abortions initially considered to deny the future of a fetus? If you plan to deny something a future isn't that a moral decision?

This is not philosophy.

that conversation is boring af and also i hate life & suck dicks

Is he high in all of these episodes?

Wait, so is she saying, the fetuses who didn't get aborted have value because of the very fact that they didn't get aborted?

Is there a more painfully obvious example of trying to come up with a justification for your beliefs?
She very clearly holds that abortion is okay a priori and has sought to justify it using some bullshit sophistic """philosophy""".

It really is glaringly absurd how these jews have promoted each other into cultural positions of power in our societies then proceed to push degenerate shit on us. This is one of the many reasons why they must be removed.

same honestly

>The universities will not exist in twenty years unless these people are purged.
Don't worry, the US tertiary education system is already beginning to see a decline, or at least a slower acceleration, in enrollment largely because Gen Zers don't agree with shrieking millennial ideology. I can only hope some serious defunding system from the federal government comes along and speeds up that process, considering some of these schools are churning out domestic terrorists.

That was the absolute dumbest moral argument I've ever heard. There is no way she teaches Philo.

>There is no way she teaches Philo.

At Princeton and Harvard no less

fuck off viral shill you're not getting a +1 view from me

Watching embedded videos doesn't give views retard