Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

thoughts on freedom?

gerrandesquire
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 1:58:07 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.

Funny how a term like that will trigger different thoughts. For me freedom goes in a completely different direction. Occasionally i will ask for help in freeing me from the bondage of self. However i recognize my particular defects of character and how they create unhappiness in my life.
gerrandesquire
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 2:03:36 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.

So freedom is not possible in the real world?
gerrandesquire
Posts: 1,258
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 2:07:40 AM
Posted: 6 years ago

Funny how a term like that will trigger different thoughts. For me freedom goes in a completely different direction. Occasionally i will ask for help in freeing me from the bondage of self. However i recognize my particular defects of character and how they create unhappiness in my life.

That is what is so confusing. What exactly is freedom? is it really desirable?
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 2:10:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 2:03:36 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.

So freedom is not possible in the real world?

Well, it is in the sense that Innomen put it, i.e., freedom from one's self-mitigating presumptions or emotional hangups, it is, but socially speaking, no.

Not unless we're talking about an isolated circumstance like a hostage situation or human trafficking. I guess you could say that it also holds meaning for members of Third World countries under colonial rule, as well.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 5:46:06 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.

Or it's a word used to define the fact that we as people are less capable than we should be because we aren't necessarily free to learn all that we wish.

Freedom itself is an arbitrary concept defined thusly; "Can I continually do all the things I enjoy doing?" if the answer is yes, you are free, if the answer is no, you are not free.

If you are not free then you need to define why with this: "Do the things I enjoy doing harm others?"

If the answer is yes then the freedom you lack is a freedom that directly and deliberately harms or offends others unnecessarily, and therefore you are an oppressor.

If the answer is no then your personal freedom is being oppressed by others. You, therefore, are not free.

For that matter, it's funny for an American to refer to freedom so negatively. You do realise that it's people like you that diminish freedom's meaning and symbolisism, if not the freedoms of the people themselves, right?
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2010 7:03:29 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/19/2010 5:46:06 AM, Veridas wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:53:00 AM, Ren wrote:
At 11/19/2010 1:29:05 AM, gerrandesquire wrote:
I have been struggling with the idea of 'freedom' for a few days.

Is it really possible for a person to be free ? What does freedom actually mean?

Since a person always tries to live under a proper social conduct, i would think that freedom is an impossible state to achieve. In fact, the mentally ill patients can be contended as being totally free because they don't care what 'should' be done ideally. But then, it is their freedom that we try to curtail, because it can be a harm to themselves.

So, is freedom not actually desirable for an individual? Freedom of individuals is not desirable for the society as a whole, but should it all really matter?

Thoughts?

Freedom is a hot-button term that loosely refers to subordination to an empire's rule, and sometimes more specifically, slavery.

Contemporaneously, it's a meaningless term meant to spur nationalism in First World countries.

Or it's a word used to define the fact that we as people are less capable than we should be because we aren't necessarily free to learn all that we wish.

Freedom itself is an arbitrary concept defined thusly; "Can I continually do all the things I enjoy doing?" if the answer is yes, you are free, if the answer is no, you are not free.

If you are not free then you need to define why with this: "Do the things I enjoy doing harm others?"

If the answer is yes then the freedom you lack is a freedom that directly and deliberately harms or offends others unnecessarily, and therefore you are an oppressor.

If the answer is no then your personal freedom is being oppressed by others. You, therefore, are not free.

For that matter, it's funny for an American to refer to freedom so negatively. You do realise that it's people like you that diminish freedom's meaning and symbolisism, if not the freedoms of the people themselves, right?

While I sympathize with your perspectives, I think you have misinterpreted me. Inasmuch as we are free, it is contingent on the lack of freedom of others. As an American, I should be responsible enough to acknowledge that. Freedom at the expense of another's life is not really freedom, its exploitation. Freedom is free of contingencies, I'd imagine, and in that case, it doesn't exist.

Pretty sure you said something just like that, so it seems that we agree.