Talk About Dead Baby Jokes (EOA p.354-361)

I was confused in the beginning and getting a little disinterested until a paragraph on the second page. I had to ask the person next to me: “did he just talking about eating babies?” The person actually knowing who the author was informed that he wasn’t being serious. After I continued reading I thought that it wouldn’t be the most inconvenient way of solving all that poverty. To some it would just seem unethical. Who knows, something like that could work if enough people opened up there minds. (Is she joking you ask. Maybe.)Most of my thoughts died about the subject when I was told that the author didn’t mean this as a literal scheme.

Eating babies… other carcasses… it is potentially unhealthy but babies or toddlers may be less apt to having diseases at that age. Like I said before I wouldn’t disagree with the idea. With people living longer the population has to be controlled somehow right? Though diseases take care a good amount of that it’s still not enough. I wouldn’t recommend eating the impoverish people though because of what they may have been exposed to. Also, it’s not like we don’t eat animals anyways or kill other humans. So what he was saying and my agreeing isn’t as absurd as you may think. It would also be efficient for the environment because there would be less people to pollute and all. That’s why the eating babies sounded more logical.

Speaking of logic, this section was title “Avoiding Flawed Logic”, I’m not sure but I didn’t recognize the flaw in this author’s logic. I’m sure I’ll be exposed to that during class though.