• NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Nope.

      I’m a person who doesn’t agree with you and I find myself in the position to interpret the rule. Therefore, I am interpreting the rule in my favour. A foetus is a person. The articles will not be delivered.

      Hopefully this makes the argument a bit more clear . In this hypothetical scenario, a malicious person who disagrees with you is in charge of interpreting the rule. You have no power here and none of your arguments will convince them otherwise.

      The only thing you can do is design a system that is robust enough that the damage that can be done by that malicious person.

      You say a foetus is not a person. That person says “nuh uh”. But they are in charge and you are not, so their interpretation stands and you have to suck it and now you regret giving that organisation the power to make that determination.

      You can think of it all in terms of game theory. You get to write the rules, then I, a malicious entity, get to play by your rules, and you can only stand and watch. Once you put your pen down, I am in charge.

      Now you can see that in this game, you would want to write rules that constrain what I can do as much as possible.

      • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        3 months ago

        You need to be born to be a person. Otherwise where do we set the limit? Maybe for medical reasons, we should set it at a certain number of weeks, but for non medical reasons should be considered the moment of birth. Otherwise when does it become hatred? Can I say “I hate fetuses under 4 weeks” but not “I hate fetuses of 12 weeks”?

        Following that logic, someone could consider masturbation as a crime, and menstruation too.

        • NateNate60@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Well, you see, I am a malicious entity that doesn’t need to listen to your logic. All I need is the power that you have given me.

          For your rules, since I am the malicious entity in charge, I can just say “I’m right, you’re wrong”, and there is nothing you can do about it.

          • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            3 months ago

            But what I said can’t be twisted. To be a person you must be born.

            There is no interpretation there. A fetus is not a person because it hasn’t been born.

            • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Ok, let’s say it a different way.

              You have blond hair, but the person who delivers your mail hates blonds and refuses to deliver to you. They deliver mail to everyone but you, and because there’s a rule that says the postal worker can choose who they want to deliver to, you can’t force them to.

              So now you have to go all the way to the post office to pick up your mail because you have blond hair.

              That’s the crux of the argument.

            • NateNate60@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              3 months ago

              You don’t get it do you?

              “Nuh uh.”

              There. That’s all I need to say to nullify everything you say. Because I have power and you don’t.