@LyssAnthrope My view isn't crazy. Most people believe at sole level biological parents are relevant and have responsibilities.
English
Galactipoly
886 posts
@LyssAnthrope flies in the face of widely accepted legal and philosophical concepts.
If we are going to ever go anywhere we'll have to find agreements and I just can't agree with your view on things like biological parenthood being irrelevant.
English
@GalacticPoly what do you think an artificial womb is? It's life support.
English
@LyssAnthrope Which is why I was desperately trying to find an area we could agree on. Just give me a minute I'm cooking.
English
@GalacticPoly This is what I'm saying like we fundamentally don't agree on any of the parameters here
English
@LyssAnthrope Yea this doesn't help because I reject the framing that pregnancy isn't care. But I think we may have in agreement here so I'd much rather focus on it.
x.com/i/status/20394…
Galactipoly@GalacticPoly
@LyssAnthrope Ok, I figured you'd explain the typo error or can I just use the first part about voluntary assumption of responsibility?
English
@GalacticPoly My point is asking if there's a duty to care doesn't make any sense whatsoever
English
@LyssAnthrope Ok, I figured you'd explain the typo error or can I just use the first part about voluntary assumption of responsibility?
English
@LyssAnthrope Ok well there was nothing illogical or wrong with my hypothetical. You never proved how it didn't isolate the principle or discern between social or biological parenthood. I don't even think it implied social parenthood.
English
@GalacticPoly Read what I said I'm not disagreeing with the definition but I don't think you should use AI summaries just in genera
My disagreement with is with your hypothetical and I said so clearly
x.com/i/status/20393…
MissAnthrope@LyssAnthrope
@GalacticPoly Ask AI whether (screenshots of) AI results are valid proof of the information they present. Your example is nothing close to a clean hypothetical for the reasons previously stated x.com/i/status/20392…
English
@LyssAnthrope I'm just trying to fully understand.
I don't know what you mean by "this does not run assumption of parenthood"
Is that a typo?
English
@GalacticPoly Voluntary assumption of responsibility to a particular child and again this does not run assumption of Parenthood and like literally it's a duty to act not to be used
I'm going to suggest you avoid Socratic.
English
@LyssAnthrope Im trying to figure out where we can agree on what creates a parental obligation. I don't know how to get anywhere if you just state your entire framework again for me to respond to every little point again.
English
@GalacticPoly Simple solution: don't try to use Socratic and just make your point.
English
@LyssAnthrope Please just be patient and follow my line of questioning. I understand you have a vastly different framework than I do. This just brings up way more things for me to respond to when I want to try and actually get somewhere.
English
@GalacticPoly Personhood, parenthood, liability for harm, duties to care for another person...
none of these things can support the kind of obligation that you are trying to create
These are not obligations that anybody else has to another person not ever
English
@GalacticPoly No born child has a "right" to use another person's body -blood/organs/involuntary physiology. Not even their parents
No one, even a parent, is ever required to undergo anything close the pain/injury/escalating risk inherent to pregnancy/birth for anyone, even to save their life
English
@LyssAnthrope Thank you! Omg.
And what would you say creates this obligation for these custodial caregivers?
English
@GalacticPoly I do. Social parents (custodial caregivers more precisely) have duties to care for children
Your argument equivocates on the word 'parent'.
Using parent’ in the biological sense (genetic/gestational) to assign duties that would never be required even of social parents
English
Once you force someone to be dependent on you for survival, you are morally obligated to support them.
This is why abortion is wrong.
English