Huwmanbeing
@huwmanbeing.bsky.social
Part ocular bat, part unusual hoon, part designer. Loves to discuss adventure games, fantasy world-building, philosophy, ethics, atheism, science.
Morality is like the rules of a game we’re all playing together.
The rules tell us what counts as fair play and what’s out of bounds.
The rules tell us what counts as fair play and what’s out of bounds.
September 19, 2025 at 7:47 PM
Morality is like the rules of a game we’re all playing together.
The rules tell us what counts as fair play and what’s out of bounds.
The rules tell us what counts as fair play and what’s out of bounds.
You claimed that every shooter is a "godless atheist". I'm just noting that that's false. Gun violence committed by Christians is very much a thing.
September 14, 2025 at 5:42 PM
You claimed that every shooter is a "godless atheist". I'm just noting that that's false. Gun violence committed by Christians is very much a thing.
Science has its scope, as does mysticism.
Understanding gods is not the domain of science — just as understanding the universe is not the domain of mysticism.
To quote Egon Spengler...
Understanding gods is not the domain of science — just as understanding the universe is not the domain of mysticism.
To quote Egon Spengler...
August 22, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Science has its scope, as does mysticism.
Understanding gods is not the domain of science — just as understanding the universe is not the domain of mysticism.
To quote Egon Spengler...
Understanding gods is not the domain of science — just as understanding the universe is not the domain of mysticism.
To quote Egon Spengler...
The dictionary definition.
August 7, 2025 at 11:46 AM
The dictionary definition.
We believe the same thing: that bodily autonomy is paramount, even over others' survival.
You made that clear.
You made that clear.
July 13, 2025 at 2:12 PM
We believe the same thing: that bodily autonomy is paramount, even over others' survival.
You made that clear.
You made that clear.
Did you get your new heart just this morning?
...Because yesterday you said it would be fine to put your bodily autonomy ahead of others' survival.
...Because yesterday you said it would be fine to put your bodily autonomy ahead of others' survival.
July 13, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Did you get your new heart just this morning?
...Because yesterday you said it would be fine to put your bodily autonomy ahead of others' survival.
...Because yesterday you said it would be fine to put your bodily autonomy ahead of others' survival.
You already acknowledged that your own bodily autonomy supersedes others' survival.
Are you saying that you too are evil and cruel?
Are you saying that you too are evil and cruel?
July 13, 2025 at 1:53 PM
You already acknowledged that your own bodily autonomy supersedes others' survival.
Are you saying that you too are evil and cruel?
Are you saying that you too are evil and cruel?
You freely admitted that your own right to bodily autonomy supersedes others' survival... remember?
Attacking others for the very thing you admit to is hypocritical, and something you may wish to reflect on.
Attacking others for the very thing you admit to is hypocritical, and something you may wish to reflect on.
July 13, 2025 at 1:51 PM
You freely admitted that your own right to bodily autonomy supersedes others' survival... remember?
Attacking others for the very thing you admit to is hypocritical, and something you may wish to reflect on.
Attacking others for the very thing you admit to is hypocritical, and something you may wish to reflect on.
No worries, you already conceded that your right to bodily autonomy supersedes another's right to life.
Hopefully you'll remember that the next time you feel tempted to berate someone for saying the same.
Hopefully you'll remember that the next time you feel tempted to berate someone for saying the same.
July 12, 2025 at 10:59 PM
No worries, you already conceded that your right to bodily autonomy supersedes another's right to life.
Hopefully you'll remember that the next time you feel tempted to berate someone for saying the same.
Hopefully you'll remember that the next time you feel tempted to berate someone for saying the same.
You've already admitted elsewhere that your bodily autonomy supersedes another's right to life.
A bit late to start name-calling now. 🤷
A bit late to start name-calling now. 🤷
July 12, 2025 at 10:46 PM
You've already admitted elsewhere that your bodily autonomy supersedes another's right to life.
A bit late to start name-calling now. 🤷
A bit late to start name-calling now. 🤷
There are also two autonomous bodies involved in (say) a kidney transplant: the donor and the recipient.
The question I'm asking is whether the recipient's right to life outweighs the donor's right to choose whether to donate.
Does it? (Don't make me tap the sign again...)
The question I'm asking is whether the recipient's right to life outweighs the donor's right to choose whether to donate.
Does it? (Don't make me tap the sign again...)
July 12, 2025 at 8:36 PM
There are also two autonomous bodies involved in (say) a kidney transplant: the donor and the recipient.
The question I'm asking is whether the recipient's right to life outweighs the donor's right to choose whether to donate.
Does it? (Don't make me tap the sign again...)
The question I'm asking is whether the recipient's right to life outweighs the donor's right to choose whether to donate.
Does it? (Don't make me tap the sign again...)
Yet there clearly is.
Note too that the term "child" is polysemous.
Note too that the term "child" is polysemous.
July 8, 2025 at 3:30 PM
Yet there clearly is.
Note too that the term "child" is polysemous.
Note too that the term "child" is polysemous.
Again: personhood is about capacity, not appearance. (Feel free to google "characteristics of personhood" to learn more.)
A mother possesses those capacities.
A zygote/embryo/fetus (of ANY species) does not.
This is why when we choose whose interests prevail, it's right to choose the mother's.
A mother possesses those capacities.
A zygote/embryo/fetus (of ANY species) does not.
This is why when we choose whose interests prevail, it's right to choose the mother's.
July 7, 2025 at 11:25 PM
Again: personhood is about capacity, not appearance. (Feel free to google "characteristics of personhood" to learn more.)
A mother possesses those capacities.
A zygote/embryo/fetus (of ANY species) does not.
This is why when we choose whose interests prevail, it's right to choose the mother's.
A mother possesses those capacities.
A zygote/embryo/fetus (of ANY species) does not.
This is why when we choose whose interests prevail, it's right to choose the mother's.
It also has the recognizable characteristics of a chimpanzee... and at that early stage you'd find it impossible to distinguish it from a human.
That's the point: personhood is about capacity, not just having fingers and toes.
That's the point: personhood is about capacity, not just having fingers and toes.
July 7, 2025 at 10:59 PM
It also has the recognizable characteristics of a chimpanzee... and at that early stage you'd find it impossible to distinguish it from a human.
That's the point: personhood is about capacity, not just having fingers and toes.
That's the point: personhood is about capacity, not just having fingers and toes.
At most stages a chimpanzee embryo looks indistinguishable from a human one... so no, that's not clear.
www.sciencephoto.com/media/110944...
Are you suggesting that something merits personhood simply because of how it looks? 🤔
www.sciencephoto.com/media/110944...
Are you suggesting that something merits personhood simply because of how it looks? 🤔
July 7, 2025 at 10:51 PM
At most stages a chimpanzee embryo looks indistinguishable from a human one... so no, that's not clear.
www.sciencephoto.com/media/110944...
Are you suggesting that something merits personhood simply because of how it looks? 🤔
www.sciencephoto.com/media/110944...
Are you suggesting that something merits personhood simply because of how it looks? 🤔
Of course she might... but would anyone seeing the image below recognize it as a person? As an individual to whom we must accord the same or greater consideration than we give the mother?
July 7, 2025 at 10:12 PM
Of course she might... but would anyone seeing the image below recognize it as a person? As an individual to whom we must accord the same or greater consideration than we give the mother?
Yikes, Frank really has no idea what he's talking about.
June 18, 2025 at 10:52 AM
Yikes, Frank really has no idea what he's talking about.
Enjoyed a beautiful morning on the Purdue campus! #PurdueDayOfGiving
April 30, 2025 at 6:32 PM
Enjoyed a beautiful morning on the Purdue campus! #PurdueDayOfGiving
No it doesn't.
You're defining atheism more narrowly than even most atheists define it.
You're defining atheism more narrowly than even most atheists define it.
April 24, 2025 at 2:08 PM
No it doesn't.
You're defining atheism more narrowly than even most atheists define it.
You're defining atheism more narrowly than even most atheists define it.
"Flawless papacy!"
April 22, 2025 at 4:49 PM
"Flawless papacy!"
The process of selecting a new Pope:
April 21, 2025 at 9:49 PM
The process of selecting a new Pope:
April 17, 2025 at 9:42 AM