Conscience and Consciousness
 

Are you saying that a criminal that say he has no concious memory of the act is Not Guilty?
I would need to be thoroughly convinced.

Originally posted by MrFun
Since both of these are intrinsic to the nature of being human The former is obviously false, and the latter arguably so.

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Are you saying that a criminal that say he has no concious memory of the act is Not Guilty?
I would need to be thoroughly convinced.
No, that's not what I'm saying.

What sort of gay thread is this, like wtf Fun?

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Denying someone's conscience doesn't mean denying them the "inner impulse which keeps you from doing things that damage others," it refers to freedom of thought (particularly moral/religious thought). That thought could be as much "help poor people" as "kill the jews." That doesn't compute for me. If you mean denying freedom of thought, then say so. Conscience is not something that can be denied (at least at our current technological level) and if philosophers use the word that way, they're misusing it in my opinion.

Note also, I used the words "deprive right to conscience" and not "deprive conscience" in the OP.

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


You misunderstand my objection.
Oh, well explain then.

Ok, yes there are exceptions, I agree, Kuci.

But those are exceptions. In general, the nature of being human is to have a conscience and consciousness.

[QUOTE] Originally posted by snoopy369
Okay, I have to ask. What are you on, MrFun? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/lol.gif

Originally posted by snoopy369


1. If they're the same thing, then why two terms for the same thing?
There are multiple definitions in dictionaries for the same word and there are such thing as synonyms.

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


I dispute that they can be intrinsic to the nature of humanity if there are exceptions.
So for you, if the only instinsic aspects of the nature of humanity are those without exceptions you cannot accept anything as being part of human nature since everything you can think of will bound to have exceptions.

Enlighten me on your thoughts some more, Kuci. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/expect.gif

Erm, any ones in specific?

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
mrfun ur on crack I agree, no sane person cares about my opinion.

Originally posted by MrFun
Since both of these are intrinsic to the nature of being human, these are natural rights rather than civil rights, correct? Drop the natural/civil distinction, it doesn't work.

No one has any right to deprive of another person their right to their conscience and consciousness with the exception of criminals. They are to be imprisoned in violation of their free will for the safey of others. What is that supposed to mean? and if we have have free will, we have free will in jail too.

Or, are there other situations or circumstances where one can deny another their right to conscience or consciousness with plausible moral and/or legal justification? Explain what you mean with "denying the right to conscience".

An example of denying other people of their right to their conscience:

Jews being oppressed and persecuted for praticing and expressing their religious belief.

Originally posted by MrFun
An example of denying other people of their right to their conscience:

Jews being oppressed and persecuted for praticing and expressing their religious belief. In what way. You can control or maybe manipulate peoples conscience. I don't see how you can take someones right away.

Conscience is defined as one's ability to distinguish himself from the affections of his mind and/or body, in other words, have an idea of the affection that is not the affection itself.

What you're talking about is freedom of expression, and, in the case of interned Jews, material freedom.

Originally posted by MrFun
Conscience has to do with living one's life according to one's morals or values. Well yes. If you don't have a true conscience then you can't do that.

This thread is really shit.

I think we all understood what MrFun really meant, we were just pointing out his discutable wording.