Robespierre Quote

Okay, Socratic method would take too long... 😛

But, this decision about creating the clone is no different than those involved in the birthing process. What if the infant is homosexual, and disgusted by what his or her parents did (even more than the rest of us are re: our parents)? What if the child is artificially inseminated, and will ultimately be against that? What if the child is artificially inseminated into a lesbian marriage? Never are the rights of the newborn/clone taken into consideration, unless it's a matter of abortion...

I'd say that a clone would indeed have a personality unique to that of his or her original "copy." Look at identical twins - they start life out the exact same, but situations can never be the same, so the twins/clones will never be either.

well then I must explain my views a bit further

A) I don't consider something alive until it is actualy born- I know it sounds harsh but that's how I feel, so I don't care for unborn their rights when it comes to abortion.

B) I am against trying to have child, like doing it 20-25 times a day or something like that, it should happen in a natural way- ofcourse I know some ppl need some technological help. well I am not gonna say I am against that, but I have my doubts.

Yeah, but there's no real difference in decisions between a would-be clone and a would-be infant - there are none. If you're against, erm, working for the baby then that's a bit different...

Honestly, I don't think I have a view one way or the other; same as abortion. I'd like to see the technology there, and if for some reason the human race because infertile I'd prefer cloning to extinction, but I'd rather a genuine son as opposed to a little Boba Fett...

Hrm...

it is a very delicate issue and I believe the human race is not ready for it

next question: Plato vs Socrates vs Aristotle.

who do you think was the most influential. i know its hard cuz they were all great IMO. Socrates was teacher of Plato and Plato was the teacher of Aristotle. Now some or most of u might say Socrates but we'll see.

ur thoughts...from my research on all of them i think Plato was most influential.

The problem is that all 3 of them influenced future philosophers and even common people through their beliefs, teachings, and writings.

true you can consider all of them important. Plato has been the most influential to Europe, but then again Plato will probably have gotten a lot from Socrates

Aristotle then again was very important to Arabia, the Jews and the Orthodox church

It's really an impossible discussion. The influence of Aristotle was also that of Plato and Socrates, and the influence of Plato was also that of Socrates. Certainly, a giant standing on the shoulders of a giant who is also being supported by a giant will see farther than the one on the bottom.

But yeah, if Aristotle hadn't tutored Alexander the Great, who knows what Greece would have done?

hmm i guess discussion is over. next question

This is one of my favorite topic.
Nicolo Machiaveli said that it is better to feared than loved...but he also said try to be loving.
if u were a leader. do you think its better to be feared or loved?

well lets see

RObespierre- feared leader- was later arrested and killed
Napoloen- used a little bit of both. but IMO he was loved by most his people and was feared by other countries.
what u guyz think..

The best is to be loved by your people but feared by everyone else.

i disagree. i think more feared. cuz too much love will equel too much freedom. someone might backstab u...

But why would they backstab you if they love you?

Actually come to think of it they are both different means to the same end, people who are loyal to you, so I don't think there's much of a difference.

hmmm but cmon do u think ur whole country is gonna love u? some will try to overthrow u. its always been like that in history....

I'd say that, based upon what I've read of The Prince, you're distorting his meanings a bit. Machiavelli said that a prince [ruler] needs to maintain an appearance of being generous, but that to do so he would greatly reduce his own wealth as the expectations of those under his rule would increase. He then said that any generosity should be courtesy of the spoils of their victories.

Basically, his stance was that a monarch's rule should be devoid of emotional and moral considerations - that there must be a logical, minimalist order to all of his actions. If something needs doing, regardless of whether it's "right" or "wrong" or if it will hurt someone's feelings, it still needs doing.

very nice^

ok i guess we should start next discussion.
next question

anyone have anything to say about Genocides? there have been many in history.

There has? I thought that there have been only attempted genocides.

Thanks.

And they're bad. 😂

lol

hegemon yes there have been genocides. for one example the Armenian Genocide. there have been many. There have been some that haven't been written down in history....brb

hege. personaly I think an attempted genocide is worse enough already