0
   

Freedom's Ideas and the Individual

 
 
Fido
 
Reply Mon 17 Aug, 2009 07:01 am
*Moderator Edit (See Note Below)

You know, it seems that the idea that one might be bound with their word is an old one, and through that Idea whole classes of people were chained to the land in Feudalism.. Not only that, but the children of those so bound were considered as bound by the same oath, and it was Paine, and I think firstly who took this notion to task...

We still feel bound by those who accepted the constitution, but what shall we do when it becomes clear the thing does not work... And if a person might be made slave by his word and enslave his future generations for all time with a word, is is not possible people might be made free with a word???

My point is, that at some point all people are considered free to dispose of their bodies, and as they see fit... We must always consider the context, and make certain that freedom is always guarded as no individual is ever free to do...People can demand freedom, but society must guard freedom as the highest morality, and that may require limiting the authority of inidividuals to bind themselves with a word into injurious or unjust relationships...

We all experience freedom subjectively and defend freedom as a society objectively... How hard is it to recognize that as an idea Freedom is perfect, and as a reality Freedom will always be less than perfect??? I would say that societies may be classed as free or less free, but no inidividual can know any measure of freedom...We are all more or less bound by culture or convention or the commitments we make to others...We must be certain that in our individual actions while seeking freedom without responsibility that we do not hurt society and limit freedom generally...

If you find the natural limits of all behavior you have found the limits of freedom and the extent of morality..

*Post split off as a new discussion item; paragraphs inserted
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 822 • Replies: 2
No top replies

 
urangutan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Aug, 2009 06:55 am
@Fido,
"Freedom", in the context of an era.
The educated world, stepped beyond the confines of the church, laboured atop the structure of feudalism and designed to reach for the beyond. Ahead lay feeding grounds, for the minds, the hearts, souls and bodies of those who stove to develop and sacrifice.

"Freedom", in the context of an epoch.
Confliction between choosing and avoidance, where the details in definition cannot cover, either being acceptable or generalized, yet popularised by suggestion or persuation and led by inflamatory coersion to instigate revolution supporting individuality and less formalised structure.

"Freedom", in the context of a period.
The ability or desire to sacrifice the inneccessity and overindulgance, of mass conformity away from the monotony of corrupted, leadership or idealists. To stand beyond the leash of pacifism to restrain the abuse so ill directed.

"Freedom", without context.
If the term of endearment, can associate within the collaboration of intent, then are we not free to demand that the definition be restricted to include, what shall be excluded.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Sat 22 Aug, 2009 06:48 am
@urangutan,
urangutan;83994 wrote:
"Freedom", in the context of an era.
The educated world, stepped beyond the confines of the church, laboured atop the structure of feudalism and designed to reach for the beyond. Ahead lay feeding grounds, for the minds, the hearts, souls and bodies of those who stove to develop and sacrifice.

"Freedom", in the context of an epoch.
Confliction between choosing and avoidance, where the details in definition cannot cover, either being acceptable or generalized, yet popularised by suggestion or persuation and led by inflamatory coersion to instigate revolution supporting individuality and less formalised structure.

"Freedom", in the context of a period.
The ability or desire to sacrifice the inneccessity and overindulgance, of mass conformity away from the monotony of corrupted, leadership or idealists. To stand beyond the leash of pacifism to restrain the abuse so ill directed.

"Freedom", without context.
If the term of endearment, can associate within the collaboration of intent, then are we not free to demand that the definition be restricted to include, what shall be excluded.

Freedom is just a moral form... As an absolute, it is impossible... As a reality people always surrender it for food, which is life, and yet never is life what it might be without freedom...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Freedom's Ideas and the Individual
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 08:02:40