Your morality, or my own?

[tjohnson]

GS, whyNOT

Re: freedom and responsibility: the claim that one cannot have freedom without responsibility is self-contradictory-one rejects responsibility exactly because he has freedom to do so. If by irresponsible behavior you mean that one infringes rights of other people, then it's exactly a freedom of his choice to do so gives to us a basis to punish him. That is, freedom is precondition of justice. If you accept GS definition n17 which includes all the rest of definitions, then you'd agree that freedom as intrinsic property of man cannot be conditional, to be part of any package deal.

'Freedom' is a word, it's not a "property of man", intrinsic or otherwise. You cannot dissect a man and observe some" freedom" inside. This is how you are making it sound. Maybe most men yearn (have strong feelings) for freedom and maybe they think they have a right to it but thinking/feeling this does not make it so. Look what happened to the native people of America when the Europeans arrived. If you believe in man's right to freedom to that extant are you prepared to give the continent back to them? In real life you have to play by the rules to enjoy any degree of freedom.

[Leonid]

GS, whyNOT

Re: freedom and responsibility: the claim that one cannot have freedom without responsibility is self-contradictory-one rejects responsibility exactly because he has freedom to do so. If by irresponsible behavior you mean that one infringes rights of other people, then it's exactly a freedom of his choice to do so gives to us a basis to punish him. That is, freedom is precondition of justice. If you accept GS definition n17 which includes all the rest of definitions, then you'd agree that freedom as intrinsic property of man cannot be conditional, to be part of any package deal.

'Freedom' is a word, it's not a "property of man", intrinsic or otherwise. You cannot dissect a man and observe some" freedom" inside. This is how you are making it sound. Maybe most men yearn (have strong feelings) for freedom and maybe they think they have a right to it but thinking/feeling this does not make it so. Look what happened to the native people of America when the Europeans arrived. If you believe in man's right to freedom to that extant are you prepared to give the continent back to them? In real life you have to play by the rules to enjoy any degree of freedom.

[Leonid]

GS

Freedom is a concept which designates man's ability to make choices and to act upon them. There is no need to dissect man in order to find this ability. It's self-evident.It exists as inherent property of man but could be denied from him by force ( like many other properties). Freedom cannot be granted-free man lives by right, not by permission. Native Americans didn't own the continent when the Europenian arrived. At that time Native Americans hadn't had such a concept as property rights and land ownership.

[Leonid]

GS, whyNOT

Re: freedom and responsibility: the claim that one cannot have freedom without responsibility is self-contradictory-one rejects responsibility exactly because he has freedom to do so. If by irresponsible behavior you mean that one infringes rights of other people, then it's exactly a freedom of his choice to do so gives to us a basis to punish him. That is, freedom is precondition of justice. If you accept GS definition n17 which includes all the rest of definitions, then you'd agree that freedom as intrinsic property of man cannot be conditional, to be part of any package deal.

Hi Leon,

If I read you right, Freedom is a Primary, not pre-conditional on anything else; or, an inalienable right.

That is an important point, but pertains mainly to the political arena.

The point I'm getting towards is how long will one's freedom last, without self-responsibility? And I don't only mean getting into trouble for infringing the rights of others.

I mean freeing oneself from fellow men: real independence. Maybe I mean 'moral'freedom, as well as 'political'.

The greater the degree of Freedom, the more the onus on a man to think and reason, not less, obviously.

(A bit vague, but I'm working on it.) B)

Tony

[Leonid]

GS, whyNOT

Re: freedom and responsibility: the claim that one cannot have freedom without responsibility is self-contradictory-one rejects responsibility exactly because he has freedom to do so. If by irresponsible behavior you mean that one infringes rights of other people, then it's exactly a freedom of his choice to do so gives to us a basis to punish him. That is, freedom is precondition of justice. If you accept GS definition n17 which includes all the rest of definitions, then you'd agree that freedom as intrinsic property of man cannot be conditional, to be part of any package deal.

Hi Leon,

If I read you right, Freedom is a Primary, not pre-conditional on anything else; or, an inalienable right.

That is an important point, but pertains mainly to the political arena.

The point I'm getting towards is how long will one's freedom last, without self-responsibility? And I don't only mean getting into trouble for infringing the rights of others.

I mean freeing oneself from fellow men: real independence. Maybe I mean 'moral'freedom, as well as 'political'.

The greater the degree of Freedom, the more the onus on a man to think and reason, not less, obviously.

(A bit vague, but I'm working on it.) B)

Tony

[Leonid]

GS, whyNOT

Re: freedom and responsibility: the claim that one cannot have freedom without responsibility is self-contradictory-one rejects responsibility exactly because he has freedom to do so. If by irresponsible behavior you mean that one infringes rights of other people, then it's exactly a freedom of his choice to do so gives to us a basis to punish him. That is, freedom is precondition of justice. If you accept GS definition n17 which includes all the rest of definitions, then you'd agree that freedom as intrinsic property of man cannot be conditional, to be part of any package deal.

Hi Leon,

If I read you right, Freedom is a Primary, not pre-conditional on anything else; or, an inalienable right.

That is an important point, but pertains mainly to the political arena.

The point I'm getting towards is how long will one's freedom last, without self-responsibility? And I don't only mean getting into trouble for infringing the rights of others.

I mean freeing oneself from fellow men: real independence. Maybe I mean 'moral'freedom, as well as 'political'.

The greater the degree of Freedom, the more the onus on a man to think and reason, not less, obviously.

(A bit vague, but I'm working on it.) B)

Tony

[Leonid]

Hi, Tony

Political freedom or free society is such a social order which prevents negation of metaphysical freedom by force. However even on the Deserted Island man has his freedom to make choices and maybe needs it most. If his choices are rational-he survives. If not-not. If he'll perish, his freedom will perish with him. The whole point is that reason is volitional and, therefore man has the freedom to be irrational. The truth is he will not last for a long. But, again, this is his choice. He may even decide not to make any choices at all, to give up his freedom and his mind altogether. You say, it's irresponsible, he cannot live like that. True.But so what? This is his life. He has the right to do so.