We engage together in, and record for broadcast, our earnest philosophical dialogues, so that we may:

  1. Enhance our understanding of life and the world in which we live.
  2. Stimulate intellectual curiosity and philosophical exploration in ourselves and others.
  3. Strengthen our intellectual skills of critical thinking and sound reasoning.
  4. Provide a forum for a diversity of thought from a broad spectrum of independent thinkers.
  5. Connect with and form a network among thoughtful and caring individuals, everywhere.
  6. Enjoy the pleasures of intellectually stimulating and philosophically insightful company.
  7. Promote the pursuit of wisdom in everyone.


Civility - Treat everyone with respect. Use helpful, not hurtful language. Listen carefully and patiently when someone else is speaking.

Sincerity - Honest opinions and innocent questions are more valuable than "scoring points" or "looking smart". Strive for intellectual honesty.

Soundness - Favor sound reasoning over emotional rhetoric or sophomoric obfuscation.

Succinctness - Strive to be brief and to the point using understandable language. Speak loud and clear so others can hear.


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay Learn More

Thursday, June 05, 2003

What is the sanctity of life and when, where, and to whom does it apply?

Highlights from our meeting on 06/04/03
  1. If we think life is sacred, does that mean we shouldn't eat meat?
  2. Does the sanctity of life apply equally to humans, cows, and carrots?
  3. How does the sanctity of life apply to decisions about abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia?
  4. What are the imperatives that come with a belief in the sanctity of life?
  5. How do we reconcile these imperatives with our gut feelings or emotional attachments?
  6. What if I like the taste of meat and my gut tells me some meat in my diet is good for me?
  7. How would I reconcile that with the belief that all creatures have a right to live?
  8. Isn't our diet largely determined by our culture?
  9. Don't people in many Asian countries commonly eat all sorts of insects?
  10. Don't we in this culture commonly eat bee poop?
  11. What do you mean bee poop?
  12. Isn't honey actually just bee poop?
  13. Don't you mean bee vomit?
  14. Does it really matter?
  15. Don't we eat honey because it tastes good?
  16. Doesn't honey taste good because our bodies are programmed to recognize nutritious food as that which tasted good?
  17. So if meat tastes good, does that mean it is good for us?
  18. Can we still trust our taste buds in this age of heavily processed foods?
  19. But isn't meat a natural part of the diet for many creatures besides man?
  20. Would it be more ethical, more reverent of life, to eat only meat from animals that already died of natural causes?
  21. Is killing necessarily antithetical to the sanctity of life?
  22. Aren't many animals, by nature, prey for predators?
  23. Aren't these animals meant by nature to be hunted, killed, and eaten?
  24. Isn't the more important question, how and why an animal is killed?
  25. Can we make the distinction between animals killed swiftly with little pain or suffering for food, and animals bludgeoned to death for fur coats?
  26. So is "dying well" part of the observance of the sanctity of life?
  27. Would this also apply to euthanasia and the idea of death with dignity?
  28. Isn't living well also a critical part of upholding the sanctity of life?
  29. By "living well" do we mean living in accordance with nature?
  30. Can we say that free-range cattle and chickens live well compared to those that are tightly confined, even though both are raised to be killed for food?
  31. How about the issue of "death with dignity"?
  32. Isn't dying naturally with dignity more consistent with the sanctity of life than remaining alive indefinitely by artificial modern medical technology?
  33. What about the voluntary ending of a life with modern medical technology to alleviate the suffering of the terminally ill?
  34. Is euthanasia consistent with the sanctity of life?
  35. And what about abortion?
  36. How would we apply this "nature is better" approach to the abortion question?
  37. Isn't an artificially induced abortion by means of modern medical technology as unnatural an act as there can be?
  38. Does that mean abortions violate the sanctity of life?
  39. Don't most women, by nature, prefer not to have abortions because of strong maternal instincts?
  40. Isn't it also true that the vast majority of abortions are performed by Mother Nature herself?
  41. Is there such a thing as a reverent, humane, and natural way for man to perform abortions?
  42. Is the imperative of the sanctity of life, then, related more to attitude and quality than to simple end result?
  43. Isn't the how and why more important than the what?
  44. Isn't the question of whether or when to kill or not to kill a separate moral question from how it is done?
  45. Whether or not we kill, isn't it imperative that we handle both life and death with the greatest of reverence and care?