Starting a new series…

I recently ran across a list of more than 100 philosophical questions to ask people.  So, providing it goes over well, this series should last us a long time… and then some!  I hope you will stick with us and participate to help make it a success.  You will know the series by the upcoming titles “Philosophical Question [#]”.  So, the next one after this will be entitled “Philosophical Question 2,” etc.  I might also include a “hint” (subject matter) in the OP title.  Not sure yet.  TBD.

Personally, I love those kinds of heavy, thought-inducing, ethically-challenging questions that philosophy provides.  Not everything can be fun and games, amiright? 😉 The questions presented in this new series are questions that you’ve surely heard many times before.  However, now your response will be “just for the record.”

Don’t worry, I won’t torture you daily with such heavy questions. 😁 Just now and then, sprinkled in with the questions you have submitted for me to post for you (no, I haven't forgotten those), or questions that I come up with on my own.  So, you will still get a nice variety.  

So… here’s your first philosophical question.

According to the World Population Review website:


                    

  • How do you feel about euthanasia (assisted suicide) for the terminally ill or those who request it?  Are you a proponent or opponent?  Make your argument.
  • A form of assisted suicide is legal in 11 states, but should it be legal in all states?
  • Have you ever had any experiences with someone who has had assisted suicide?  Tell us that story.

If you are outside the U.S., and there are several of you, please feel free to chime in regarding your own country’s situation and your feelings about it.

(by PrimalSoup)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more