u/Impressive-Coat1127

join here

Psychology Nerds is a perfect place for experts, students and laymen to come together to discuss Philosophy, Academic Psychology and Language! We have experts from varied backgrounds such as Philosophy Masters, Psychology professionals, psychiatrists actively engaging in the community, with tons of resources for beginners and as well as advanced stuff that are being expanded vigorously.

The community is highly strict on rule-enforcement make sure to read their rules before participating.

join here

Psychology Nerds, is a server that I moderate specifically for Academic Psychology, Philosophy and Language, we have tons of good resources, large collection of books and other kinds of resources that we're actively seeking to expand, and people from various backgrounds of expertise.

Join us here: https://discord.gg/5AU9xYshCG

title

They're really annoying sometimes but whenever I try to engage with them it feels like I lost all of my chain of thoughts. Is there any good way to have a productive discussion with them?

How good are you on the scale of 1-10, 1 being you don't even know how to ask about the weather and 10 being your mere presence speaks. How do you test how good you are

interested in men's perspectives

_This is not a bodily autonomy topic: If women should have the right to abort kids_

please bear with me and read the whole post. I'm asking from a, rather, ethical POV that, if you guys think abortion is morally justified.

if it is justified to what extent it is, and to what stage, do you guys consider a foetus a human? (not just a human's foetus) but having the same or at least similar moral worth as humans.

Commonly, I've heard that since a foetus isn't consciousness it doesn't experience pain, it's not unethical to abort it. The pro-life side argument is that since a foetus is absolutely certain to be a human person it deserves at least near-full moral worth, this is quite intuitive and basic. Psychological criterion argument is that if it experiences pain, is conscious, (often: has self-awareness) it deserves full moral worth, but this quickly falls to bedridden sick people like in coma, kids with brain abnormalities. Now a lots, here say, consent and interest also matters, two points come to my mind ¹if a person has no interest in living are we allowed to kill them? 2nd, and more important: A foetus inherently never possesses, wills, wants so it may in future regret being born, so that means we shouldn't have kids, all together, to begin with, because they might not consent...? There are strong cases to be made for why a foetus basically deserves near-full moral worth. The thing I've noticed is that the more you try to argue against a foetus being "not a person/human" the more you leave room for actual grown humans to not be a person or a human either.