Sunday School 3rd January 2021
January 6, 2021 at 4:53 am #35849
But you possess a trump card. There is always one thing you can do to exercise ultimate freedom: You can kill yourself.
I do think this is a factor in the anti gun-control fight for many Americans…
Claiming the lives of 23,000 Americans every year, including 1,100 children and teens, firearm suicide is a significant public health crisis in the US. Nearly two-thirds of all gun deaths in the US are suicides, resulting in an average of 63 deaths a day.
Where is your evidence? All I ever hear from the pro-gun folks is self-defense, fending off home invaders, and breaking up robberies. In other words, it’s always about killing other people.
Since more people die from gun suicide than gun homicide then obviously it is on people’s minds. A fast way out right there in the sock drawer. You really think pro gun types would ever admit to this? I have had several experiences when some dude brings out a gun to show it off and then says something akin to “here is my long term health plan”.
The quip “here is my long term health plan” can be understood in various ways, one of them being “In case I get confronted by some hostile punk with a knife, my gun can keep me healthy and alive,” which would be the opposite of suicide. I don’t know why, unless someone is buying a gun specifically to carry out a suicide, being able to commit suicide would be one of the reasons to get one, given the many other ways of offing oneself which are less messy, for one thing, and less likely to be botched. I think I have mentioned insulin as a very easy and effective way to simply turn out the lights. No, I think most gun suicides are impulsive, whereas to do oneself in with opioids or insulin requires at least a modicum of planning and preparation. And if you want it to look like an accident to ensure your survivors can collect insurance, driving into a bride abutment at 80+ mph is the way to go because you could have just fallen asleep at the wheel.
Nah, rural boys don’t like wussy drugs or wrecking nice cars on purpose. This is gun culture here. That’s the tool…if it’s a deer, a hog or yourself that needs killing. Drugs don’t always work and they could find you and save you. Gun suicides are the most deadly @ 85% success rate.
Stuff like this happens all the time….Gun people just like having something fast and lethal, whatever the occasion.January 6, 2021 at 6:04 pm #35850
@_Robert_: The first article contains no evidence suicide was in the man’s mind when he bought the gun.
The second article is clearly an impulsive act by someone suicidal at the time he obtained the gun. He bought the gun specifically for the purpose for which it was used.
The third article likewise offers no evidence that suicide was among the reasons the gun purchased. If he purchased it recently, it was likely his only reason for buying it. If he had it for a while, there is even less evidence suicide was on his mind among other reasons.
Your problem is that we can’t look into someone’s mind, which is where the evidence for your thesis would be found.
January 6, 2021 at 7:13 pm #35852
- This reply was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by Unseen.
Unless, of course, he decides some other pressure compels him to kill himself.
The pressure is that the individual is not thriving.January 6, 2021 at 7:52 pm #35853
Unseen, I think it is a contingency tool in the back of their minds in case there is an impulse. Do you think a suicidal person should have access to a gun? This is why there will be no evidence of my “thesis”( LOL) from gun people.January 6, 2021 at 10:27 pm #35860
Unseen, I think it is a contingency tool in the back of their minds in case there is an impulse. Do you think a suicidal person should have access to a gun? This is why there will be no evidence of my “thesis”( LOL) from gun people.
I can tell you quite sincerely that a transient impulse is a major reason I DON’T have a gun around. LOLJanuary 6, 2021 at 10:34 pm #35861
Each individual organism carries physical DNA molecules. Within the population of the species, there are multiple versions of genes (or gene sequences). Because the number of carrier organisms is limited by physical resources, then if any one version of a gene is to stay numerous, it has to somehow compete against the other versions. The numerousness of the other versions is another limiting factor on each. If they all compete, then there is competition to reproduce and survive among carrier organisms. Hence, individual, internal pressure to survive and thrive in each organism.
A case of The Incredible Shrinking Hypothesis. You originally said you had “philosophical” reasons for using suicide to exercise one’s freedome. Read what you just wrote and point out the philosophical points made there. There are none. You’ve abandoned philosophy altogether and collapsed into arguing from biology.January 6, 2021 at 11:16 pm #35863
Philosophy needs to be based on data, does it not? Since it is a science of everyday life, and everyday life is factual.
This is the data I’m basing my hypothesis on. Biology is a fundamental aspect of everyday life.
Is evolutionary ethics a branch of biology, or philosophy? Probably, both.January 6, 2021 at 11:23 pm #35864
Philosophy needs to be based on data, does it not? Since it is a science of everyday life, and everyday life is factual. This is the data I’m basing my hypothesis on. Biology is a fundamental aspect of everyday life. Is evolutionary ethics a branch of biology, or philosophy? Probably, both.
No, not necessarily, but my point is that you left philosophy totally behind and have lapsed into an irrelevant biological argument that applies a lot more to a description of a species than to decisions of individuals.January 7, 2021 at 12:18 am #35867
Simon you always mischaracterise philosophy. It is not a science nor does it particularly deal with “every day life”. It deals with large abstract questions. Yes scientific data can be used. Yes rational arguments and evidence is necessary. But it is NOT a science. Yes, SOME questions deal with every day life. The majority in fact do not. Defining things is not every day life. Formal logic is not every day life. Theory of mind, artificial intelligence and most metaphysical theories are not every day life. Some ethics (and only some) deal with every day problems. Most are large highly abstract systems. I would say, as a casual estimate of all the books I’ve perused and titles I’ve gleamed in the Leuven Philosophy Institute Library that maybe 10% deal with every day life. That is mostly (though not all of): political philosophy, aesthetics, some ethics and social philosophy. That is a small portion of it.
I repeat…and hopefully for the last time: Philosophy is NOT a science and it does NOT principally deal with every day life.January 7, 2021 at 12:52 am #35871
Pursuing Davis’s line of reasoning, Plato’s metaphor of the cave has NOTHING to do with everyday life. Quite the opposite.January 7, 2021 at 7:09 am #35880
an irrelevant biological argument that applies a lot more to a description of a species than to decisions of individuals.
Why do you think that? What is your reasoning? Why does it apply to species, a lot more than individuals?January 7, 2021 at 7:10 am #35881
Philosophy is NOT a science and it does NOT principally deal with every day life.
Maybe, but it uses scientific thinking.January 7, 2021 at 3:23 pm #35884
No. It’s not a maybe. I studied it for five years. I know what I’m talking about.
but it uses scientific thinking.
What does that even mean?January 7, 2021 at 4:25 pm #35885
What does that even mean?
Rational, logical thinking educated by data.January 7, 2021 at 5:18 pm #35886
Rational, logical thinking educated by data.
No that definition would apply to MANY subjects in academia including psychology, engineering, medicine and law. Also philosophy was using “rational, logical thinking educated by data” for centuries before science as we know it came along. Try again. Hint: the scientific method plays a very large role.
- This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by Davis.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.