2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum

GLD 414.48

+0.7%

Jan 9 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (187885)	5/25/2022 5:28:39 PM
From: sense	1 Recommendation Recommended By Maurice Winn Read Replies (2) of 219221

The virtues are always virtues... as is true in any time period. They just don't come pre-packaged as a stand-alone option, free of error or myopia, that is available to be selected from a menu. As "you are what you think you are, so be careful what you think you are"... is always paired with a reality check that occurs in a social context... it requires there will always be conflict between society's choices... and those of a person, who has to be making choices as an intrinsically individual element within society, with the unique choices made by individuals necessary for progress. But, while progress is not the only potential outcome of the lack of restriction on individual choice... neither is the enforced lack of individual choice in the interest of greater social cohesion... purely virtuous... rather than an openly institutionalized evil requiring by force that it be accepted. How to resolve the conflict that must exist between the expression of different virtues... in different contexts... and between individuals right of self expression and the "social good"... that might not be "good" at all ? The two prevailing "theories" appear to be... "law and order"... or "anarchy"... as the only options. But, of course... that's a fallacy... adopted for purpose... as institutions like individuals tend to be self-aggrandizing. Balancing the two... is not that complex in reality... demanding limits on government... and limits on individuals... defined at particular "red lines"... beyond which neither the empowerment of the individual nor the "social" is of benefit to either individuals or societies. Clearly, there's a role for society in fostering understanding of virtue... and that role seen in context of the particular value of social cohesion...ideally is one that elevates individuals within a social context that is aware of, values and emphasizes the value of the "personal" virtues in the education fostering its citizens ability to realize their individual potential... within a context that also imposes limits... on both the individual and the aggregate power of society to impose on an individual beyond those well defined limits.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next