Frank and actor/comedian Sally Phillips discuss ‘the world’s most dangerous philosopher’ and Down's syndrome screening. See the full video here: www.bbc.co.uk/i...
Well said Sally Phillips. She absolutely nailed it when she said that interdependence is a higher value than independence. We live in such an individualistic culture that we have lost sight of that, and it's one of the reasons why people are becoming more and more lonely and depressed.
@@biegebythesea6775 Can you elaborate? I imagine it's because being self sufficient or independent is better for self care and survival. But sometimes you need to depend on others. ?
I agree. Independence is overrated. Being interdependent is how we humans have survived. Being unique individuals with different characteristics is beneficial to all of us. I'm neurodivergent and physically disabled but my worth isn't measured in what I can do for myself but how I can live with others as harmoniously as possible. Sometimes I'm the helper, sometimes I need help.
I thought she was pretty damned cool. Then I heard she was religious (for which, in this day and age of scientific enlightenment, there's no excuse for not being able to see religion to be merely a tool that capitalism oppresses people with).
@@Gayalert69 I love it when people don't know what arrogant means! :D But patronising too? Maybe you just lack self-respect and think in these days of ecocide capitalism (and its religion tool) is a fantastic idea?
I found this video today after Matthew Parris being all over the internet describing a chilling future where euthanasia will be made more available than care, especially for those who can’t afford care. We need more people like Sally.
I'm trying to remember the name of the famous anthropologist who, when asked what she thought the first signs of civilisation were, said that she thought the first physical sign was an ancient leg bone that had been broken and re-healed during the lifetime of it's owner. The bone had belonged to one of the first beings to have been identified as human. It meant that , in order to carry on living and not to have either starved or been eaten by wild animals, that person would have been helped out of danger and looked after. They would have been fed and cared for enough to have healed and been able to take part in society again. I agree with that famous anthropologist. We can only call ourselves a civilised society if we care for those who are weaker than ourselves, be that injured, disabled or weak in some other way. The whole group thrives better together than if we start to discriminate.
I have been in that situation when I had a full term stillborn little daughter who had spinabifida and encephalitis.I was devastated.When I got pregnant again , they did amniocentesis test at 14 weeks to see if the condition was present in the baby.If it was, then termination at that stage would be offered.I was in two minds..I was young ,only 22 , and it seemed cruel to carry this little one to full term and he/she be stillborn.I couldn't imagine that loss again...and yet I didn't want to make that decision and deprive a child of life.Fortunately the baby was ok and I had a healthy child.Its a hard decision to make and I wouldnt want anyone to be judged for making it.
The decisions we sometimes have to make as parents are almost impossible at times, especially when we're young. I'm so sorry for the loss of your first baby but so pleased that all went well with the next. As a bereaved mother, I know a new baby doesn't take the place of the one we've lost but it does make us more aware of what can go wrong and thus make our decisions unbearably difficult. ❤🤱❤
I have an enormous respect and admiration for Sally Phillips. I have been watching episodes of the undatables obsessively; what a shame that this series is seen as exploitative by some viewers. For me, it is a source of warmth and inspiration. If I am honest, I feel ashamed that I struggle to find such pleasure in the simple things in life when compared to the courageous people depicted in this series. I think Sally is right to promote a deeper appreciation of what is truly valuable in life. As someone who teaches ethics, I do feel that Peter Singer is portrayed in a bad light. To understand Singer’s views two points are crucially important. Firstly, Singer’s goal is to illustrate the inconsistency of giving moral consideration to humans only and not to animals. He uses his argument from marginal cases to show that any properties that humans have that can be used to anchor a reason for giving moral status is a property shared by animals also. Such properties include sentience, cognitive abilities, and so forth. In this context he is not saying that people with a cognitive incapacity are worthless, but rather, that we ought to broaden the scope of our moral considerations to include animals also. Secondly, an important aspect to understanding utilitarianism is that it is a completely impartial and impersonal theory. It aims to find the best social distributions of commodities so that the maximum utility can be derived from a given commodity. In this context, due to the principal of marginal utility, the more evenly a commodity is spread the more experiential value the consumption of a commodity will produce. The recipient of the benefit is completely irrelevant in this equation. If a hundred cans of coke are given to a single person this will provide less utility than when the 100 cans are given to a 100 individuals; the first unit of something is more valuable than the second, and so on. In this context, the question of ideal distributions has nothing at all to say about the intrinsic worth of recipients. Ideal distribution involves sensible decision-making with regard to finite resources. A respect for the value of life can be maintained no matter what the distribution. Ironically, Sally's comments concerning the level of joy experienced, and given to others, by her son Ollie might mean that a higher level of utility can be achieved when something is given to Ollie as opposed to tired and jaded me.
my mum was Austrian and she and her brother grew up in hitlers time. my uncle had emotional difficulties my grandmother was a single mother which in catholic Nazi Austria was not a good place to be. he was placed in a mental hospital in Graz and euthenized by Nazi doctors not before he was experimented on in a very horrible way by being tested for various experimental drugs that the regime were trying to produce for its soldiers. He was considered unfit for life. he was 21 when he was murdered. Don't ever trust people who wear white coats just because they wear white coats
I watched “World Without Downs”, SF’s documentary. I can’t recommend it enough. It’s so moving and beautiful. What shines through is the intrinsic value of the human spirit that has nothing to do with an individuals ability to earn money or compete in some reductionist Darwinian nightmare future dystopia.
"sorry about my name my brother thought it would be funny to change my name...." I am a carer to a little girl name Zahra, which she has down's, She's a bright and lovely girl. To me I find Zahra being normal to me, she is still a person but I believe they are a gift of life. They are special and they all have something about them. Since I've been her carer everyone's noticed a change in her, she makes me happy and a world with out special is not a world at all. Its not a race! I'm happy someone has taken time out to show a life of a child with downs, Sally is amazing
Well said Sally. Just suppose it was unkind people put outside the circle instead. When Sally comes to power it shall be law to love one another and be kind !
Sally Phillips is amazing in her approach to life . Keep going Sally and I for one believe in your out look ,inspires others to realize what is going on behind the masquerade ,which we call governments .
The word ‘Compassion’ means to ‘suffer with’…that is the reason why the injured lifeless body is dragged through the desert? The ending of a life either through abortion or euthanasia is not compassion it is the antithesis of compassion.
In Canada the Government will even help you top yourself now. Mr Singer explains the philosophy of the WEF towards the "useless eaters", that's us folks.
I fail to see how this infringes upon the rights of Down Syndrome people already here…? I mean a woman doesn’t have to give a reason for an abortion, and patient privacy means you have no right to know. I’m afraid there’s little you can do - making the world better for disabled people is great, but to many women having a child with Down Syndrome simply doesn’t conform to their parental expectations and desires.
Maybe you are an ignorant or a souless zombie monster, down syndrome could be considered not a disease. It is just a variation or difference that some human have in the same way people have different skin or hair. Or think about homosexuality is not a disease according to many scientists, it is just a biological difference since birth which influences on sexual desire towards the same gender
PEPE DESTROYER Wtf are you talking about? The other commentator said nothing about Down's being a disease or about discriminating anyone. You just decided to make that "ignorant" assumption. How about trying some real dialogue before jumping to conclusions. Here is a starter: "I disagree because of . How do you think he's misrepresented?" From the sound clip they played, their claim of what he thinks is not backed up. I'm question some of the things Singer says, but I don't think their interpretation is correct. And neither was yours about this commentator. (A cut and paste for a cut-and-paster)
Trust me, Peter Singer is a pure academic and I don't think he'd be advising any governments. He also believes that people should give all their wealth away to the world's most poor until their means are relatively similar. Governments are not listening to them.
It’s almost on the level of Eugenics, I think it is horrific. Utilitarianism is an in-human, relatively modern form of philosophy. We only succeeded as a species because of our empathy.
The whole germanic aryan race mythology was fundamentally flawed right from the outset, try & think of it like this, you have a bunch of cats, a siamese, a berman, a persian, a burmeese, a abbysinian, & a tabby - which one will be the most genetically resilient & the strongest of them all, of course it will be the mongrel the tabby, there is your answer to the final solution!.
When I was at Westbourne Road , Birmingham Polytechnic in the late 1970s, Iour Psychology lecturer was Rex Brinkworth. He was one of the first people to object to the term Mongol for children with Down's Syndrome. We met with him and supported him in his work fundraising etc. There is absolutely no reason why these children ,with the the appropriate stimulus, should not lead an interesting fruitful life. It is worring for us all that there are people out there who think they have the right to choose who lives or dies. Ray Hancock
Also, I cannot see how the cost of supporting people with severe disabilities costs greater utility than the loss of that person's life, plus the impact on the relations of that euthanised disabled person
Singer is getting old he won’t be a tab for much longer. Tab=temporary able bodied. Is he going to televise his decision once he enters the category he despises?
Their desert example is off. Well, more like too vague. How is the group ‘better off’ without the injured person. Is the injured person an inconvenience? Or will other people die if they drag the injured person along?
I've worked with many Special Needs kids and adults and despite being measured with a "genius level" IQ, but with decades long severe depression, myself? I've often found myself thinking I'd switch places with someone with Downs because I'm far less able to enjoy life. But if offered the chance to switch I would never do it because I wouldn't want to burden such sweet people with this.
My nephew was born with Muscular Dystrophy, diagnosed at 10 and died after 13 years of horror for him and all the family. So, would I screen and abort if MD found and save years of misery, fear and grief? Absolutely yes. Did I think this in my 20's when expecting our first child? No. (Just shows how ignorant we are when younger)
The way I understand Singer is he is just trying to protect animal rights. I believe every sentient being should be cherished. A human being (whether typical or not) should not be considered above an animal, certainly not a mammal. At the same time, I do not believe disabled people should be considered a comunity. They are people who are vulnerable and have to be protected , and the way we do so defines our humanity and level of civilisation. But turning a disability into a cultural entity may be another p.c. mistification. Could be wrong...
Talking about rights in incredibly unhelpful, usually just a proxy for outrage. I have never heard Peter being described as "the most dangerous". Any damage people may think he has done is more than undone by his work on animal welfare. The issues of the disabled pale in comparison to animal welfare issues. I don't know if Peter is quite as rigid as Sally is characterizing him, he brings up valid points about wellbeing and economics but insists that parents have the last word on termination. "...kill the disabled" - that is certainly not an accurate paraphrasing of the clip you showed - well done for lowering the discourse to an emotional level. COMPARISON TO HITLER! Oh come now. Down syndrome is not a disease??? Really? Based on the definition is clearly is, although its a pretty broad definition. I know Sallies motivations come from a good place but is definitely an example of the regressive left.
Downs syndrome is not a disease, it's a difference that some humans have in the same way people have different coloured skin or hair. We are all different in some way & it's that difference that makes us all the same. Let's not screen out difference, it's something that we should accept & cherish.
It's characterized by physical growth abnormalities and intellectual disability! Of course it is a disease - using the (as I noted above) somewhat vague definition of abnormality in form or function, this ticks both those boxes. Yes everybody is different however this genetic coding error guarantees you will be placed at the bottom end of the intelligence spectrum. Yes treat them well and with respect but it makes my eyes bleed when people say its not a disability.
Damien van Hoogen van It is neither a disease nor a disability. We are all born with different chromosome's & with different levels of ability. Downs syndrome is quite simply a difference along with other syndromes such as autism. These people are perfectly normal & should be treated with dignity & respect, as we all should 🙂
+Formula: Downs is classified as a "genetic disorder." People are born with 10 fingers. Yes there are some born with 12, we call that a defect, it's just a definition, not a moral judgement. I think people are triggered by a negative connotation around words like disease, disorder, defect, etc. Humans are born with 22 chromosomes. Yes some are born with 23 just like with 12 fingers. The biology text books will not list humans as having "either 10 or 12 fingers, either 22 or 23 chromosomes." Calling something a defect, disorder, or disease does not imply negative connotation. Way more people have diabetes than downs, diabetes is still called a disease, and I don't hear the outcry akin to yours from the diabetes community.
Is Peter Singer actually saying that you should kill the severely disabled? Is he not just making the point that those included within the species homo sapiens have absolute rights, and those than don't have no rights. Isn't he just making the comparison to criticise our treatment of animals?
Yes but it is ill considered as the example he uses is built on a false and discriminatory idea of disability. He needs to use an example of the known rather than unknown or fallacious to demonstrate the point accurately. (From a life long vegetarian and mother of a person with complex support needs)
Singer has never said we 'ought' to kill the disabled. Merely that parents should have the option. I know a lot of people will still find that abhorrent but I do think it's an important distinction.
@@Tashio240 it's not exactly taking away the right to life, singer doesn't believe anybody has the 'right' to life disabled or not. This already happens. Doctors allow babies to die if they think it's for the best. Singer just suggests bringing about their deaths quickly and painlessly
Wow considered public discourse by two intelligent people, who'd have thought? And they never used the word "like" to punctuate every point. This was 2016, and we are now in an era where questioning the systemic prejudice and discrimination of our respective western cultures is both acclaimed and derided as being "woke". Rightly the misogyny of patriarchy and the deep roots of racism are being challenged, and yet the likes of Singer are rarely challenged, indeed he is lauded for his work. Somehow it takes Sally and Frank in their beautiful quietly understated way to destroy and debunk Singer's miserable subjective bitter views on life. Think on this: I'm an atheist, but I understand that the idea of rights as a construct is a post enlightenment idea, informed by Judeo-Christian and Islamic principles, but essentially determined as a response to the limitations of religious views about rights, eg that slavery was and is a bad thing, something that is horribly compromised in two of the three big monotheistic religions. And yet Singer, an Ivy League Philosophy professor can centre his ideas around the sanctity of life merely as a critique of religion. He is a fraud, an evil fraud and his work will be used as a basis of the tenets of the next generation of National Socialism. That he is seen as being credible and worthy of consideration, is simply appalling.
How ironic that Singer - three of whose grandparents were murdered in the Nazi Holocaust - should advocate killing disabled people. This man is truly beneath contempt.
It does make me feel like I am everyone's idea of perfect. Yet my mother wanted a son. Took Thalidomide whilst pregnant with me - and my sister is my biggest disability. The desert story of going in the desert and leaving the person injured doesn't make sense to me. If my father in law and I were walking in the desert and he needed a wheelchair, I would push him. If we got to the border and needed to pay a million of the local currency to get past, he would pay for himself but leave me behind ? If I didn't make the money? I need him for things and he needs others sometimes. I go to the railway station in a foreign place and ask someone for help as to which platform I need, but in my home town, someone asks me. We all need eachother. Should I, as someone who does not need glasses look down on all who wear glasses ? Gays, unmarried mothers, who hasnt been looked down on ? I find being perfect makes people like my sister jealous. And hurtful. A disability in its own right. For the record, I was a geriatric mum and did not have any test as I would have accepted what I was given. But then, I would not have had IVF either. I don't believe in messing with nature. I believe in choice. For each individual.
Maybe you are an ignorant or a souless zombie monster, down syndrome could be considered not a disease. It is just a variation or difference that some human have in the same way people have different skin or hair. Or think about homosexuality is not a disease according to many scientists, it is just a biological difference since birth which influences on sexual desire towards the same gender
PEPE DESTROYER Wtf are you talking about? The other commentator said nothing about Down's being a disease or about discriminating anyone. You just decided to make that "ignorant" assumption. How about trying some real dialogue before jumping to conclusions. Here is a starter: "I disagree because of . How do you think he's misrepresented?" From the sound clip they played, their claim of what he thinks is not backed up. I question some of the things Singer says, but I don't think their interpretation is correct. And neither was yours about this commentator.
2 года назад
@@pepedestroyer5974 *"could* be considered" indeed.
Anyone interested in this episode would do well to read Eva Feder Kittay (if they haven't already) who, as a philosopher and a mother of a cognitively impaired daughter, picks up the gauntlet thrown down by Singer on this. She argues, quite rightly, that the science of Singers arguement is corrupted as he is ignorant about the subject he uses as a comparative example. He uses a stereotype or cipher of a 'disabled person' to stand in for an actual 'disabled person'. He doesn't have any idea (or desire to know) what the actual capacities are of people with disabilities, but presumes based on descriminatory, dismissive and false presumptions of how society sees the disabled. He might be trying to raise the estimation of animals in humans eyes by comparison but in doing so, perpetuates the social devaluation of disability in the same way that people use racism to dehumaize people of colour. There is no difference. Both are, ironically pig ignorant, although I'm sure Singer would be offended about what that says about pigs.
Kittay's essay is titled: The personal is philosophical is political: A philosopher and mother of a cognitively disabled person sends notes from the battlefield (2009). Highly recommend
The philosopher is so wrong I can’t even begin to say. He’s nvr experienced pregnancy and the anticipation. To suggest that some ppl r non viable and add nothing is self serving. The one thing ppl with down syndrome children say is that they are the most loving and wonderful people and that they add to the parents lives. I wonder if sometimes they’re put here for that very purpose to change others.
No he is correct. We need to learn to be though again to become a strong and resilient society that can survive. Stop this feminization of every societal topic just because some leftist woman are weak and fake cry a lot to bully the rest of us into their wrong politics. Compassion is a virtue not a right, that goes for illegal migrants flooding our white countries bringing low IQ, terror, rape and knife crimes, it's also true for all sorts of social nonsense programs that only breed fraud and misuse and things like disabilities in fetuses. Get though, life is hard, you either protect your own or you go extinct. There is no sanctity of life otherwise we would have to make abortions illegal, you couldn't defend yourself against an attacker, in a war you couldn't shot at the invading enemy and ill people in hospital couldn't get their wish of not ending up on life support or getting hard drugs at the end of a painful cancer ordeal. So there is no sanctity of life and we should never accept this dangerous dogma because it takes away our individual freedoms and the ability of our societies to be strong.
Stumbled across this, Peter Singer is looking pretty old now, recon he’s out lived any usefulness…………. Carding for those less fortunate is what sets us apart from the animals……
