So let's get off the specific of manually looking at the gas level. We can agree that you have to deal with that.
Specifically around the computers in the car - Do you have a tire pressure monitoring system in your car? Do you trust it? Do you have ABS? Do you trust it? How about a GPS system? Do you use and trust that? Do you carry backup maps with you in case it fails?
What about your microwave. That's a computer - do you trust it? That's a pretty important item to put your trust in.
My general point is that there is no rational reason in believing one computer over another. Computers are all buggy - it just depends on to what degree.
You fail at argumentation. I don't have to attend a catholic public school to start a debate and have an opinion regarding the topic -> should gov't funded catholic schools and other schools should have to teach sex ed the same way.
Do you have an opinion on life after death? Have you experienced the death penalty? Are NFL athletes overpaid? Should celebrities have private lives?
:)
To your point that "adults understand the risk" I don't believe that all adults actually understand the risks of what they doing. Some don't care about the risks either.
What about adults who are parents. Should they tell their kids what to do?
Check the definition of just - you might be in for a surprise.
I'm sorry I offended you with my new terms. A simple google search and wikipedia lookup will help you understand them. By using those terms I was trying to further the discussion and figure out what people truly believe in. It's hard to do that when talking about vague terms like "justice" and "right". If we can narrow down the aspects of what we are talking about we might understand where the differences are.
In your mind just and right might be the same thing. You might also think you know what is "just" and therefore you know what is "right" and vice versa. That's fair for you to think. I do not think I possess this level of knowledge.
Two quotes come to mind:
"Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it." Andre Gide
"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination, from authorities who have not themselves examined the questions at issue but have taken them at second-hand from other non-examiners, whose opinions about them were not worth a brass farthing." Mark Twain
Just/Right/Fair - all made up ideas and all depend one's perspective. Suicide bombers are an example of where someone thinks they are just and right. On the other hand some would disagree that this is just or right. So who is right? Who should decide "the right way".
I dispute your argument on the basis that you provide no reasoning.
Your answer equated to:
Indeed: Should this be the way it is?
Victor:01 No - it shouldn't be that way.
Indeed: Why not?
Victor01: Because it shouldn't be!
Not very helpful in further a discussion/debate
Why do you find this distinction scary?
There is retributive justice and there is utilitarianism justice. They are different views on the same philosophical idea. Both views think they are "right". Neither one of them can claim to be "right".
Stealing an argument the negative side because I think it is a positive.
"Cats are intelligent, evil, and will do what they please."
Don't forget independent (which is basically do what they please). I like that quality about cats. They seem to be able to think for themselves unlike dogs.
Dogs are too dependent, need constant care and walking. You have to carry a bag around to pick up their crap. At least with a cat they go in a defined place (after being trained).
