wantd2B1ofthestrokes

Circle back to something I already gave you a clear explanation for?

Learning facts works in some contexts. The context of hot button political issues, it does not

Nothing wrong except it doesn’t work.

Kids generally don’t have ingrained opinions or social groups formed around whether or not 2+2=4 and generally they’re really just concerned with passing tests

Now this isn’t always true and in cases where it is you WILL have trouble teaching. But the vast majority of school curriculum is not this way.

Social beings as well. I wouldn’t even say it’s about how you present facts. We are pretty bad at interrogating our own reasoning for things. We will quote facts when asked for our reasoning, but once you start really digging in it’s often not really about that.

I actually just finished reading “How minds change” by David McRaney and would recommend it to anyone.

But if I had to summarize my biggest takeaway: you can’t really change someone’s mind, you can just facilitate convo with them that leads to them changing their own mind to some degree.

The context there is obviously very different

Yea it is easier for them to ignore. Choosing to ignore it is still a choice. And the effect of that choice is the continued suspension of human rights. There is no true option of sitting out.

The point is framing it as a “political issue” takes the responsibility off of them. Again, it’s true they see it that way, but all I hear is they only care about themselves.

So do you currently think abortion should only be allowed in instances that are about the mother’s health?

As far as I can tell you see abortion as an “exception” that allows killing of a specific type of human.

While I am not really concerned with humanness. But of the underlying phenomenon that make protecting humans something we should want to do.

If you think about why we want to protect humans and tie to to consciousness and ability to suffer. There’s no exception and we can use our knowledge of human fetus development to inform abortion policy to prevent abortions that would infringe on those conditions.

The more fundamental issue is tying it to “humanness” at all. And I don’t think dependence on the mother really comes into play in terms of if it deserves protection. There’s really no reason you couldn’t have a concious parasite.

All of the highlights why it’s important to define what specific qualities we are looking for in determining the degree of rights an entity would have.

Idk man. It just seems like you’re saying “political issue” but what you mean is “doesn’t affect them”.

And I think the whole they’re not “anti” these people they just don’t care enough about them to vote for them to have basic protections is a tough sell. At some point it’s a forced choice, and sitting out isn’t really an option.

I guess maybe it’s how they truly see it, but it doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny.

Disagree. They just believe what they believe for “non-rational” reasons. Often social or emotional reasons that they aren’t explicitly aware of. We all do this.

It doesn’t make them incapable of reason.

Fundamentally I don’t believe that a large proportion of humanity is “stupid.” I think that’s pretty narcissistic.

And this attitude often seeps into the continuously fact quoting method. Which basically makes the whole thing a non starter

It wouldn’t because I have criteria, most specifically the ability to suffer, that underpins how I feel about abortion. This is independent of wombs or even DNA potentially.

I mean, I understand not wanting to allow violence on humans. But this still tied back to the definition of human. And, for me, if we take it back to ability to suffer, it makes a direct case for the way I feel about any entity’s (human or non human) rights