Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (8925)	12/14/2010 10:49:11 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

>>"Societie's rules at times will impinge on an individual's feedom [sic]. So melding the two is what is needed, but also a dilemma." I can't speak for Koan but I've always considered Locke's treatment of enlightenment philosophy to be the hinge upon which the melding was established for our society. Jefferson placed Lockish commentary in our founding documents...with kickers from Montesque. Locke seems to have been the first to make the connection for us as a culture that human beings could not live under any sort of tyranny but must establish an authority which is agreeable to all through social contract without violating the natural rights of any one of society's members.

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (8925)	12/14/2010 10:55:57 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 10087

As for your attempt at clarification, "people should be free to manifest their destiny" isn't any better as far as defining freedom goes. It is so vague that it means nothing on its face, but could be construed to mean just about anything the speakers wishes. I agree that it's difficult to follow. Recognizing, though, the routine use of aberrant labels, I took manifesting one's destiny and existential to mean self actualization and responded in that context. But that's little more than an educated guess. FWIW.

To: Oeconomicus who wrote (8925)	12/14/2010 11:18:37 AM
From: koan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I don't define freedom, or the role of society, in general. That is what the people in democracies have to figure out for themselves. I would only go as far as defending democracy over any other form of government. I have found the more educated a society is, the more sophisticaed they answer those questions. E.g. you make this pronouncement. That is your opinion. which is fine, but just an opinion. <<"The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right.">>