What If Freedom Doesn’t Serve The Greater Good?

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by JBeukema, May 11, 2010.

  1. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    Thought I'd mirror this guy's post here, as it should make for interesting discussion


    original
     
  2. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    The individual is not bound to act in the greater good.

    The only constraints on an individual's actions are in so exercising his liberties that he does not violate the rights of another individual. Whether or not his actions benefit some undefined greater good is a nonissue.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: May 11, 2010
  3. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    The perfect government affords us freedom to act in our own best interests right up onto the point where such individual freedom creates a tragedies of the commons.

    We don't have that perfect government by a long shot, but that's, in theory, what this nation stands for.

    The problem as I see it is this...who decides when an individuals freedom to do as he chooses becomes a tragedy of the commons?

    And reasonable men can disagree about that issue, too.

    Pollution is a good example of that.

    We ALL pollute the earth just by being.

    But some of us pollute it more than others.

    At what point does society have the right to say to one person or group of people:

    What you are doing, the mess you are making, is effecting everybody else, ergo, everybody else (acting through the government) has the right to make you stop?

    This is not as easy as question to answer as the radicals (of the libertarian or of the collectivist persuasions) would like us to think.

    But individual FREEDOM often does not serve the greater good. Often individual freedom actually is a malignancy to the commonweal. (Crime is perfect example of uncurtailed freedom, for example)

    And so we creates laws to curtail our personal freedoms in defence of the collective good.

    No society can exist in a state of absolute freedom.

    Not even the most wild eyed libertarian would want to live in such a state of anarchy.

    But total freedom IS anarchy.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
    Last edited: May 11, 2010
  4. Avatar4321
    Online

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,511
    Thanks Received:
    8,156
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,135
    If freedom doesn't serve the great good it's because people are ignorant to what's in their best interest. And such people will destroy themselves whether they are free or in bondage. So it's better to be free.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,502
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,918
    Freedom has nothing to do with a societies greater good. We are not free in the US because that is for the greater good. We are free because it is the right thing to do.

    The US has never been a collective and claiming one must be for the greater good and that freedom must serve the greater good is all about collective.

    I have a right to be as free as I can be so long as my freedom does not harm another's freedom. That right was bought and paid for by our Founding Fathers, numerous wars and lots of dead and maimed soldiers.

    No one has the right to remove my freedom because of some Greater Good. And I will fight to protect my right be free from anyone that tries to take it, even claiming it is not for the greater Good.
     
  6. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,316
    Thanks Received:
    12,691
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,739
    What is freedom?

    I would like to have the freedom of living on an un-polluted shoreline but apparently I don't because some think that the greater good means drilling off my coast.
     
  7. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    -because that is good?
     
  8. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    I love how people say you shouldn't have to do that which is 'good' or 'moral', yet they then claim that their anarchy is good and moral and claim the moral highground for their arguments.
     
  9. JBeukema
    Offline

    JBeukema BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    25,613
    Thanks Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    everywhere and nowhere
    Ratings:
    +1,705
    It's not good for a society to be free? It's not moral and just?

    right=good
    save for the whole federation thing...

    like roads, police, and a common military defense?
    say the anarchist and the murderers.We lock up rapists and deny them their freedom and liberty for the greater good of the community.
     
  10. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,634
    Thanks Received:
    4,475
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,001
    No. it simply is.

    The individual good does not necessarily have to be the greater good. The term greater good usually implies that one act not with one's own individual wants and needs at the forefront but rather works for another's benefit.

    An individual has no obligation to work for the benefit of another. His only obligation is to not violate the rights of any other individuals.

    Maybe you should start by defining your terms.

    What exactly do you mean to be the "greater good"?
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2010

Share This Page