Why is freedom good?

Because, in the context of your analogy, the world hasn't seen many governments that were good masters. True freedom includes the freedom to fail, but it tends to beat the alternatives.

We also tend to think we have better common sense than a dog. It may not be true in a lot of cases, but that's how we feel.

 

That's just silly. That's like asking why air is important, or water, or having food to eat. Freedom is food for the soul. I'm having a hard time with WHY anyone actually can ask that with a straight face. What's so important about it? Fail to PROVE why freedom is important? What planet are you from?

 

Because we are not dogs...

 

i think using a animal that was domesticated ,ie: had all its natural instincts bred out of it so we as humans could lord over it and use it as a tool is a very bad analogy when your trying to make a arguement against freedom.

so by that analogy you have no problem being imprisoned,having everything you do restricted by a overlord,trained to do the labor of others and obeying a master as long as you get three square meals a day and healthcare??

then i suggest you go commit murder and youll be in paradise..or better yet go back in time and become a slave on a plantation..

so i am guessing you support slavery as well as long as health care is included?


ridiculous..

 

one of the best posts I have seen from you here
:cheers2:

 

The analogy was that of a creature being guided, controled and cared for by a wiser creature with its best interest at heart.

To move out of the realm of analogy.
Isn't a group of people wiser than one person?

The trick is to insure that government excersizes control with best interest of the governed in mind.

The goverment (as individuals) being subject to the same laws as the goverened is one technique.
Elections from the populace, rather than a heridary goverment is another.

 

But any system is open to corruption.

 

To say that people are not dogs is a simplistic generalization.

To say, on the other hand, that a group of people is wiser than an individual is also simplistic generalization.

I vote freedom, but freedom carried to an absurd extreme can be harmful as well.

It's not a matter of freedom, or not. It's a matter of the specifics, and for the specifics to come into play, there need to be communities, and some form of government.

 

Good luck with that.

 

Good luck with anarchy mate.

 

It's good for your mental health.

 

How about we compare a tiger in the wild wish a domesticated dog. Does the dog still come out the luckier?

It seems to me that it is a basic fact of life and existence that we each have the right to govern ourselves. We each have the right to exist, and therefore the right to support that existence by the best means possible, provided we are not infringing on anyone else's rights in doing so. We are not born to be fodder for other people, or to have our lives directed by governments and institutions for some greater end. We are each an end in ourselves, and we exist to fulfil that end. We have a right to happiness, and to the pursuit of happiness, so long as we respect the rights of others in that pursuit.

 

This is an argument in favor of education, not control.

 

Actually, I don't think a group of people is wiser at all. If I have to be lorded over, a group is no better than an individual dictator. No group is wiser than an individual when it comes to making life choices. Only the individual is capable of deciding what is right for himself. I stress again that this does not include the violation of others' rights.

 

There is some middle ground to this, which is the idea that some semblance of order be imposed by government to ensure that the evil aspects of human nature, namely greed and the pursuit of power, be kept in check, protecting ourselves from ourselves. A double edged sword, considering government often manifests itself as the very characteristics it's purpose is to suppress. If we could do away with the evil within human nature, we wouldn't need government. Based on my personal observation, evil is not necessarily something that is learned, some folks are just born sociopathic, which is why I'm not sold to the idea of anarchism.

It seems to me the value of freedom is self evident. The more freedom we have, the more choices we're able make to realize our true potential, be who we want to be, be who we are. And if we choose to do ourselves in, so be it, so long as we don't hurt others in the process.

There's a philosophy that children are born omniscient, and that "civilization" causes them to lose their knowledge by penning them in with experience. I think the same concept works with freedom, which is why it's key to look to our kids as roll models to remind us what it means to be free.

 

Kids are born knowing absolutely nothing, except for the nipple sucking instinct. They are especially clueless when it comes to getting along with others. The ultimate role model is a mature, open-minded adult who knows how to use freedom in a wise and responsible way.

 

QFT:cheers2:

 

Children are closer to the Divine Source than adults are.

 

Divine source of what? Animal instinct? An angry toddler wouldn't hesitate to kill you if he could, and would have no understanding of what he had just done. An infant is every bit as self-centered as any wild animal.

 

I presented a theory, I didn't say I agreed with it, but you're right, kids aren't born socialized, they're programmed to get along with others, which enforces my point about human nature being fundamentally self centered. Those who don't "mature" to the point of playing well with others become a problem to society, which is why we need government to maintain order.

By the same token, kids enjoy ultimate freedom, not in their actions, but in their thoughts, because they're not yet constrained by socialization.