No Such thing as Freedom

Discussion in 'Politics' started by G.T., Feb 17, 2010.

  1. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,508
    Thanks Received:
    7,574
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,459
    If you read any literature regarding Conspiracy Theories, they all seem to have one thing in common: they theorize that Language is used to manipulate the masses. Ok, but those are writers taking advantage of gullible people THROUGH Language to sell their books. Anyways, to my point though:

    Freedom. I was pondering this the other evening and I wanted to share. I may have been showering, I may have been on the toilet or I may have been pretending to listen to someone's boring conversation at the time. I've come to the conclusion that Freedom does not and cannot exist to its full extent.

    I pondered this from two angles: Mankind and God. For all intents and purposes, I used the Christian God.

    God: God gave Man free-will, but not the freedom to act on it. He provided a set of laws, or Commandments and in breaking those you pay a price. Repentance. Paying a price is the antithesis of freedom; thus, God's "way" does NOT provide free-will but simply a will to "do whatever you want, but PAY the consequences." Pay/Consequence = Not free.

    Man: Primitive man: Free, yes? No. Think strength, and through that strength a hierarchy. You can, at any time, take the pack-leader's woman behind the bushes at your will, but then, you have the consequences. A spiked tree-branch to the facial structure? A brutal, to-the-death fist fight with the possibility of his incisors cutting into your Arteries?

    Modern man? America, a free Country? Laws are the antithesis of free. They're a consequence for acting a certain way, and since some of your actions have a consequence, or a price, you are NOT free.



    This enlightenment was not to say that Freedom is, or should, even be possible. But.................it is shear PROOF that infringement upon our freedoms is necessary for Mankind to co-exist with one-another.

    The ideals of America were phony, you see. We are not a "free" country, but I suppose one could argue we were "as free as possible, or close to it." The argument of politics in America begins where each-side feels a Freedom is necessary to forfeit, such as Killing, Stealing, Privacy, etc. Interesting, but we're not and never were "free."

    -Agree, or disagree?
     
  2. Big Black Dog
    Offline

    Big Black Dog Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    22,906
    Thanks Received:
    5,107
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,702
    I'd like to comment on this post but unfortunately I am not free to do so.
     
  3. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,508
    Thanks Received:
    7,574
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,459
    :clap2: :razz:
     
  4. Liberty
    Offline

    Liberty Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,058
    Thanks Received:
    548
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    colorado
    Ratings:
    +548
    Modern American is the #11 most free society according to some study I read somewhere. Canada was #10. Haha.

    No though, freedom and liberty are merely ways to describe a society where the individual can do whatever they want as long as they don't infringe on the liberty of someone else. It's that simple. That is where the rule of law comes in, and that is where corruption sets in. It's sad but human nature.

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I]YouTube - The Philosophy of Liberty[/ame]

    describes it well enough.
     
  5. MIPS
    Offline

    MIPS Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    963
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +156
    This is stating the obvious don't you think? Of course human beings are not free to live without enduring the consequences of their actions, that would be accounted as "being free from reality", the laws of "god" or man are no different in this regard, e.g. you are perfectly free to jump off a cliff you are however not free from the effects of gravity.

    Secondly the very reason that humans conceived the institution of government was to protect their life, liberty and property from violation by other human beings, thus civil society recognizes that the individuals freedom is limited by the freedom of others, e.g. you are free to jump off a cliff, you are not free to throw someone else off it against their will without suffering the consequences imposed by society and by "god".
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,508
    Thanks Received:
    7,574
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,459

    Of course it's obvious, but that's besides the point. There are many platitudes, even within Liberty and Property, which are arguable and nuance. Also God, according to the Christian Bible, does not grant you free will. Or he does? It's another one of those weird Biblical contradictions that the writers didn't have the foresight to eliminate.
     
  7. Liberty
    Offline

    Liberty Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,058
    Thanks Received:
    548
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    colorado
    Ratings:
    +548
    Do you consider freewill and natural law to be the same?
     
  8. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,508
    Thanks Received:
    7,574
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,459
    I just feel that words have meaning and if your "will" tells you to do something.....but that something has a consequence, then it was not "free" will. Language is the basis for our communications and this Biblical inscription is contradictory.

    Natural Law is a myth. It's somewhat based off of Homosapien thought and ideal and not always off of Nature's external properties themselves.
     
  9. Liberty
    Offline

    Liberty Silver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,058
    Thanks Received:
    548
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    colorado
    Ratings:
    +548
    a myth? Natural Law and Hobbes/Locke were great visionaries, I suggest you read some of their work (especially Locke). But to adress this myth of yours, Natural Law is important because it defines that man's rights do not come from government, it comes naturally with being human whether that from God, the Moon, A raingod, or whatever is irrelevent. It is a great concept and one that I wish was taught in school. I cringe when I ask a teenager where their rights come from and they answer with "government". Your rights are natural. (a little off topic but this is the basis for a free society, and I will be the first to admit the USA has lost it's way horribly)
     
  10. G.T.
    Offline

    G.T. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2009
    Messages:
    47,508
    Thanks Received:
    7,574
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    out
    Ratings:
    +27,459
    I disagree. Natural Law was a man-made concept and not made by Nature; therefore, Man's Rights didn't "come from" God or the Moon or Naturally, they came from this man-made concept/interpretation of what MAN thinks should be a "right" of all. It's 110% man made and unnatural.

    Natural Law, had it been provided through Nature, would have existed and been understood before the sentience of man; however, killing is and always will be a part of Nature and the food-chain is more Natural Law than-is the illegality of Murder and the "right" to live.
     

Share This Page