Transability: Becoming Disabled By Choice
don't these people have to work for a living? Pictures!
I am interested in an O argument for for the psychological standards of "normalcy" and if they have been changing over the last 50 years and what the next 50 might bring as far as standards go.
I am interested in an O argument for for the psychological standards of "normalcy" and if they have been changing over the last 50 years and what the next 50 might bring as far as standards go.
I just invented that, and it means the person has too much money and desperately longs to be stricken with unrecoverable poverty.
Furthermore, I propose to help those people, if any should turn up. I'll willingly take all their money and other wealth. No loose body parts, though. Don't want those.
Although at the fringes, someone will yell eugenics, the fact is that nature and biology and the species that inhabit those realms, have been throughout the long trail from single cell things in the mud to us, unforgiving of too extreme a divergence from the norm of a species. Whether these people suffer from a genetic abnormality or a developmental problem or just an obsessive desire to belong to some group that seems to get the attention--they're not compatible with life. For centuries, babies born with tails had those removed immediately by the midwife or Dr. In more recent years, a morphandite was 'assigned' a sex by the Dr., sometimes without the parents decision process, and babies born with detectable abnormalities that wouldn't normally survive were pronounce still born by the midwife or Dr.
As ethicist, sociologist, psychologist, social workers, and minority rights groups became more and more involved in our lives, they've fought to find an acceptability foothold in community through the abuse of altruism by humanizing the abnormal. I think to a large extent, this desire to understand the abnormal probably began to really gain steam with Freud and his contemporaries and the socialist of the late 19th century and has simply progressed. It will continue and as the ability to join technologies with biology increases, there will be more abnormals trying to survive and those dissatisfied with their humanity or seeking uniqueness, will search for satisfaction in more atrocity supported by socialist striving to alter the perceptions of normalcy.
If we are paying for it as a society that is where the problem lies, not in letting people mutilate themselves in some way. If they had to pay for it and still had to get their bread through their own sweat, tears and blood this would not be happening.
"It's OK to be a human being and make all the mistakes humans make, as long as one doesn't intentionally harm another--or as importantly one's self."
Objectively, that seems to provide to me a perfect definition of mental normalcy, incorporating a pretty broad range of human thought and action within the normal range. Saying that, there are certainly situations in which the amputation or alteration of limb or organ, improves the living or ability of an individual, i.e. cancerous limbs or organs, or crippled limbs that a prosthesis can correct or improve on, etc. But I can't, ethically accept any imposition that requires that I support another in his normal and/or not normal activities or choices. Ethically and logically, I can accept the principle that such individuals, or groups, can be allowed to make their own choices and suffer from the consequences and further, that even individuals that have a mental or nervous system defect or physical defect beyond their control, be allowed to live or die in that condition, excepting where parents or other source voluntarily provide sufficient support for such individual.
But the Objectivist has to ask, can there ever exist a condition that requires of himself, from his own production, support (physically-financially-emotionally), of any individual or group. I can think of only one, the case where my choice of action directly harms another and I had reason to believe or know beforehand that my choice would harm that other, to the point that the other can, as a result, no longer support himself, with no contributory fault on his part.
As to a Libertarian argument of limits to reason, that's nonsense. There are limits to current knowledge, but reason is infinite within that current knowledge and logic doesn't change, the more information or knowledge becomes available. There are groups of Libertarians that are socialists, pacifist, communalist in their basic understanding of individual and community responsibility and altruism to others, but they lack a philosophical understanding of freedom. They want freedom from government, but not from each other.
I could only stomach the article once (and I want to keep my stomach): did it say whether these people are now eligible for public disability payments?
My guess is yes, and by today's standards, they can double dip: for both physical and mental disability...
I do love donuts...down to about one every few months now...
I have always felt that, deep down, I needed to eat donuts all day. I'm trapped in this body. I'm forced to live a lie. I'm a victim and society should pay for it. When my weight hits four bills I should be given any job I want, too. (thanks Kaitlin Jenner)
Normalcy is at best a vague and tenuous concept.
I do however feel confident of one thing. Those of us here discussing this would not fit a moocher/looter definition of normal...not even close.
The people spoken of in the article however, will be embraced as normal by the looter/moocher society as yet one more cause that warrants a very expensive and never ending government program to "help" them.
Jan
The ones with the rings in the lobes that look like large Hot Wheels (tm) rims do handicap themselves in the job market. First impressions do matter.
I believe that the tossing away of "spare the rod, spoil the child" philosophy has had a significant impact on the development of real adults. We've now had a few decades to notice the difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQAXX08...
Being trans-able is at a psychological, and perhaps a neurological, malfunction. I am not going to be tolerant of something so completely foreign to life itself.
Trans-abled? The subject makes me want to vomit.
I watched an episode of one of those dumb crime shows (my wife is an addict) where there was a support group for pedophiles. Not a group to "cure" them, but to encourage their behavior as "normal". Why should any of us believe that this couldn't, eventually, become accepted as well? Imagine your 60 year old neighbor molesting your 7 year old daughter and being protected by the law because he was "born" this way? Believe me...unless something is done, this is a real possibility.
P.S. I don't mean to pick on 60 year old folks...it just seemed that "dirty OLD men" (I'm almost there, myself <grin>) seem to be more frequently targeted in these instances.
I will pay for the disability that is self-inflicted?
This is utter insanity.
worst, downright evil; a sort of masochistic eleva-
tion of deformity over healthiness. Someone who
deliberately does this to himself (absent an emer-
gency, such as cutting off his own leg to escape
from a burning car) does not deserve any help
in his disability (unless he does it out of some
kind of insanity).One sympathizes with the
Hunchback of Notre-Dame; but then, he did not
ask to be that way. I would have much preferred
not to have epilepsy.
But, no, I do not think that it is anyone's business except that of the person handicapping themselves - as long as (as LetsShrug says) we do not have to pay for their self-mutilation hobby.
This is not just a modern phenomenon - self mutilation has been part of society for millennia (Ceres - self-castration). So perhaps there have always been outliers who felt this way about themselves.
The trouble with not-accepting these people's right to self-mutilate is that anything that regulates them may effect the ability of people to have trans-human changes made to themselves. For example, I have sometimes toyed with the idea of having a bodymod: a tiny magnet inserted into the tip of one of the fingers on my left hand. This allows you to 'feel' magnetic currents - you can, for example, tell if an electrical cord is live or not just by passing your hand over it.
So I would ignore these people and let them sort it out with their loved ones, shrinks, and consciences. But I would not pay them a cent or grant them any handicapped status.
Jan
Same level as Attention Deficient Disorder - an excuse to retain self esteem when one has no self respect. Another is using alcohol or drugs as an excuse for anti-social behavior.
Claiming right of freedom for not wearing protective gear such as helmet whern riding a motorcycle is yet another example. The answer there is in the above post. Your stupidity you pay the bill.
a helmet. . and I have insurance. . it's so strange that
the logic of my actions costing society allows social
demands of me. . I am ruled by others way too much
already!!! -- j
looks like this::: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=2007...
.
GRIN
BMW 900 and at the current cost I'm not replacing it.
an FX (first factory "chopper" by Willie G Davidson);;;
bought the harley for $2544.18 .......
and sold it in 2011 for $10k. . then applied that to
the '07 hog. . it's a reallllllly comfy machine, as long
as I keep it within 20 degrees of vertical !!! -- j
.
[BTW, is the prefix "trans" being used to imply transitional, transitory, transfer, a state of change (aka transObama)...]
"Objectivism defines normalcy as actions that lead to the furthering of individual achievement, individual productivity, individual rights, and logical thought. Actions which lead to restrictions upon individual achievement, individual productivity, individual rights, or logical thought are to be vigorously opposed."
Here's my argument: if you are intentionally seeking looter status, you need mental help. If you don't want to be a participant in productive society and seek to disable yourself either mentally or physically, you also choose to allow the rest of us to completely ignore you. I'm not against voluntarily helping people (of my own free will - NOT through taxation) who have _temporarily_ fallen on hard times. I draw the line at condoning this kind of willful act in ANY form.
p.s. Yes, they are changing -- fast! . just look at the
worldwide view of LBGT... no longer "scandalous."
.
This one is more of irony, in particular in terms of the article in this posting and timing. The link below describes how scientists (you know, those intelligent, sometimes geeky and ruthlessly moral people who are the producers of solutions to problems instead of making more of the latter) have created the first lab-grown limb. Hope for those disabled "not by choice", and further shame on these crazies...
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/06/04...