Search the Community

Here's a slightly out-there proposal. Should people feel responsible for bad things that may have occurred due to a seemingly unrelated act? For example: Bob is driving home one night. Bob drives 10 miles over the limit and accidentally hits a deer and kills it. Bob is responsible for killing the deer. Same situation, but Bob doesn't stop quick enough to not bump the deer's leg. The deer limps off into the woods, bob is responsible for hitting the deer. Now that deer 2 weeks later is crossing another road. A car is going the speed limit but the deer bolts out, not fast enough to get away due to its hurt leg. The car crashes into the deer, the deer goes through the windshield and kills the driver. Is Bob responsible for the death of the driver? If Bob wouldn't have been going so fast he wouldn't have hit the deer's leg and so on. Is this a legitimate way to assign responsibility, or are there degrees? This argument is really interesting and I don't see a way to refute it because nowhere between Bob hitting the deer and the deer killing the driver is there another fork in the road of free will.

I'm debating my philosophy professor on friday, and if its possible, maybe I can receive some tips on this topic? the debate topic is "Should prostitution be legal" First, since its allowed.. I'm gonna play the "5 Most important questions" youtube from stef then I'm going to go on from there I'm gonna start with defining the word prostitution and the word legal prostitution which is the voluntary exchange of service for some kind of resource.. mostly the currency in that specific geographical area... money - as a base first principle legal which is the permission of behaviour allowed by the government based on a geographical location the professor is going to argue from effect as expected but she might jump from M and E from time to time My Argument "When a transaction that which involves two or more people that is voluntary isn't a problem for that which has consent from both parties. for example.. if two people voluntarily engage in a sexual interaction.. sex.. then it is called "Love making" If either one of them are is forced to engage in the interaction then it is called rape. If a behaviour is then called Illegal, it doesn't mean that the behaviour is bad.. although there are consequences, people who decides to engage in any behaviour that which results to a negative effect should provide some restitution to those who are affected. in this case, prostitution.. since there are some expected risks, the effects could be temporary.. or worse.. permanent.. concerning health. thus Making prostitution illegal wont solve the problem as in most in all cases, it only exacerbates it." Her expected argument ( I'm assuming that she will list a bunch of list that supports that it should be illegal like rape.. physical/mental abuse etc. ) My response " ( I have a link that provides statistics that mentions that majority of prostitutes were abused as a child most by their parents and some by guardians.. 92% of them wants to leave the said profession) showing that.. making it illegal is the worst solution to solve the issue, as first.. violating property rights of the prostitutes and the Buyer in some states as the law forcefully persecute two consenting adults in the transaction.. just because a few politicians says its wrong and 2nd placing them inside a prison (showing some statistics of rape inside the prison) which is a den of more rape seems very counter productive. " at this point what ever goes.. Lolz any tips? corrections? suggestions? thanks -Irwin Leonardo (Location; Victoria,B.C. Canada)