A Conversation with a Professor

At the University of Maryland campus outreach exhibit, CBR staff member Seth Drayer and an associate professor of philosophy engage in conversation, beginning with the matter of defining humanity and leading on to a deeper question: from where comes human value?

Category:

Education

Tags:

• center for bio ethical reform
• pro life institute
• university of maryland
• seth drayer
• professor
• conversation
• abortion
• bio ethics
• debate
• humanity
• humankind
• value
• genocide awareness project
• campus
• outreach

[alycinann]

Seth, great job! I love how she had to concede the point that it is not permissable to kill humans, which seemed to contradict her original dispute. It amazes me that she refused to admit that she had value or that humans have value--what a perfect example of relativism. It shows how ridiculous it is to attempt to live under the mindset of relativism. She certainly doesn't live by her implied assertion--that humans don't have value--and yet she kept turning to that cop-out, "Value?? Huh?"

[JimDeferio]

I am absolutely seething that this "Professor" shows such lack of understanding. She should be fired for incompetence. I know the young man did his best not to talk over her head but he may have been presuming too much - that she even had one!!!

[JimDeferio]

@veineum Your command to me to "revise" and "stop" lack the necessity of imposition. You are very intolerant and judgmental but can't justify a standard that gives you a "right" to do so. You are a hypocrite and contradict your obvious worldview which lacks standards and objective morality, etc.

[JimDeferio]

@veineum Several things you need to justify in your comments.

"Fictional:??? What standard are you using and what criterion for authentic historicity are you using for making that judgement that the Bible is "fictional"?

Your moral statement that implies that you think slavery, rape, and genocide are wrong. Who says they are wrong? You? Is that just your opinion or are you using an ultimate, objective, unchanging, universal standard?

Prove that the Bible promotes those things!

[veineum]

@JimDeferio The young man is basing his views on morality on a fictional book that promotes slavery, genocide and rape- the Bible. You should and your ilk (the religious, militant type) should revise your source of morality and stop trying to belittle others who don't think deriving moral rules from capricious, imaginary gods is a viable way of life.

[vidfreak56]

The notion of value is relative to your beliefs. The woman is correct. The speaker is not. Having value can be interpreted differently. One can have value to another person. One can also have value granted to them "by a creator" (which is really value attributed to another person in disguise). But if they had value granted to them why would the creator make us so different. A mentally retarded person has little economic value, but does this mean they have value enough to not be killed?

[ryddelwearsahat]

Humans do have value(but that value changes depending on circumstance).. but I prefer considering what is best for society as a whole- and abortion is oftentimes best, especially in an overpopulated time like this. A thinking, feeling, independent woman.. is worth infinitely more than a fetus that does nothing but float and grow, especially if said fetus threatens the already-existant woman's ability to provide for herself- education, job, mental/physical/emotional well-being, ect..

[forest51690]

You can't make a point that humans have value unless that value has been vested in us by a Creator God. See 3:57

[wwjd19jeff91ynwa]

And right about when I was going to close down this video, at 7:20 a very good question was asked: what makes a human life valuable. And men, I'm glad that guy's a believer :D Cos I wouldn't find a better way to explain why abortion is wrong. God bless you!

[ladyEulaelie]

She can't even admit that she has value, and if she doesn't have value, and if humans in general don't have value, what good is her or anyone's rights?

[ladyEulaelie]

How funny. This professor has mental block as soon as the question involves a situation about her. When people are in denial of the truth they say, "I don't know/ we don't know".

And why do pro-choicers like to turn this argument into a religious debate?? They wouldn't need to explain the existence or non-existence of God as to why someone shouldn't randomly kill them. My pet peeve besides people avoiding answering tough questions....like this woman did.

[Dauphin35]

If you pressed her, you would have found that this magical butterfly has all the characteristics of God, except that it has been given the accidents of a butterfly for no apparent reason. It's a variation on the flying spaghetti monster argument, and no serious philosopher would use it. It's a futile attempt to escape from God.

You should have simply stipulated that your presentation is aimed at those who believe in human rights and left it at that. You shouldn't have indulged her.