Confucius' Birthday!

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Thingle

The thing is, there's no such thing as "too much freedom". It's either there is or there's none.

Could you please elaborate? I believe that Freedom can exist with limitations.

Freedom to eat. I can only have as much freedom to eat as I can. I can eat some, eat a lot, eat little. I can have some food = some freedom of eating, a lot of food=a lot of freedom of eating, little food= little freedom. The eating part only serves as example.

What do you think?

EDIT: Happy Birsday Confucius!

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Cipher

Could you please elaborate? I believe that Freedom can exist with limitations.

Freedom to eat. I can only have as much freedom to eat as I can. I can eat some, eat a lot, eat little. I can have some food = some freedom of eating, a lot of food=a lot of freedom of eating, little food= little freedom. The eating part only serves as example.

What do you think?

I can always point out my absolute freedom from annoying people whenever I put someone in the ICU.

[justsomeguy]

Originally Posted by Thingle

The thing is, there's no such thing as "too much freedom". It's either there is or there's none.

Including the freedom to express hate or incite violence? European countries have hate speech laws, and by no means do they have no freedom.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

by no means do they have no freedom.

yes they do. they have freedom from racial hatred. I dare you tell me there's such thing as "too much" of it.

[justsomeguy]

Originally Posted by Thingle

yes they do. they have freedom from racial hatred. I dare you tell me there's such thing as "too much" of it.

However, racists have no freedom to express their hatred. Therefore, there is a limited amount of freedom (favoring non-racists), and not too much freedom (where scum are allowed to express their irrational hatreds).

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

However, racists have no freedom to express their hatred. Therefore, there is a limited amount of freedom (favoring non-racists), and not too much freedom (where scum are allowed to express their irrational hatreds).

A person's freedom from the discriminating attitude by these sumbags is absolute. and immesurable. There's never been such an occasion like a local minority community negotiating how much hate propaganda should they take lying down.

[Proto]

Originally Posted by Thingle

The thing is, there's no such thing as "too much freedom". It's either there is or there's none.

In that case there is no such thing as freedom. We are bound by our physical bodies and capabilities from the moment we are born.

We have to analyse the inherited philosophy from our ancestors in their right measure and context. Even if they are influenced by concepts that we consider backwards nowadays (like being a misogynist) it was the de facto way of thinking back then, and by no means his own fault.

Aw well, in any case, we can feel free to disagree with him in light of our own beliefs

Originally Posted by meotwister

Knowledge for the sake of virtue.

I am a believer in knowledge for the sake of knowledge

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Proto

In that case there is no such thing as freedom. We are bound by our physical bodies and capabilities from the moment we are born.

the violation of freedoms does not equate with its absence.

[Proto]

There is no such thing as 'freedoms'. In your words, it is one single entity. It is either there, or there is none.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Proto

There is no such thing as 'freedoms'. In your words, it is one single entity. It is either there, or there is none.

Yes. It's either there's absolute freedom or there's none.

[justsomeguy]

Originally Posted by Thingle

A person's freedom from the discriminating attitude by these sumbags is absolute. and immesurable. There's never been such an occasion like a local minority community negotiating how much hate propaganda should they take lying down.

"Absolute and immeasurable" in what way, and compared to what? You're already implying that "freedom from discrimination" is higher than "freedom of speech."

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

"Absolute and immeasurable" in what way, and compared to what? You're already implying that "freedom from discrimination" is higher than "freedom of speech."

There is an old idea that one's freedoms ends when another's begin.You have your little McFreedom of speech, of course. But it ends the moment it enroaches on my freedom from hostile and harmful behavior on your part. That cannot be negotiated.

It is still absolute, because of the fact that negative freedom is absolute. The freedom to do something is something I do not consider as "freedom".

[Proto]

Yes. It's either there's absolute freedom or there's none.

Great, we are in the same channel. Continuing from where we left,.according to your definition we are destined to never be free given that we are not God, and from the moment we are born we are limited by our own mental and physical prowess as humans. We will never have the freedom to instantly teleport, the freedom to understand everything in the universe or the freedom to become omnipotent. Hence, in that sense, we are not free, no matter how we choose to live.

[justsomeguy]

Originally Posted by Thingle

There is an old idea that one's freedoms ends when another's begin.You have your little McFreedom of speech, of course. But it ends the moment it enroaches on my freedom from hostile and harmful behavior on your part. That cannot be negotiated.

It is still absolute, because of the fact that negative freedom is absolute. The freedom to do something is something I do not consider as "freedom".

So you're saying that the freedom not to be affected by other people is absolute?

What about the case of certain people who are offended by everything? There's at least one party pooper in every town who considers everything everybody else does to be "offensive."

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Proto

Great, we are in the same channel. Continuing from where we left,.according to your definition we are destined to never be free given that we are not God, and from the moment we are born we are limited by our own mental and physical prowess as humans. We will never have the freedom to instantly teleport, the freedom to understand everything in the universe or the freedom to become omnipotent. Hence, in that sense, we are not free, no matter how we choose to live.

Like I said, The "Freedom to" is not something I consider as a real freedom. So your points are irrelevant. Yes we are free. What hinders us from finding ways to teleport, understand everything and whatnot? We are only not free if there are expressed prohibitions against it (finding ways), but it does not mean that the "freedom from" does not exist, but is only violated by someone else.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

So you're saying that the freedom not to be affected by other people is absolute?

What about the case of certain people who are offended by everything? There's at least one party pooper in every town who considers everything everybody else does to be "offensive."

Sometimes I think whenever freedoms conflict, there should be the "duel option".

You know, let's just have a fight and whoever wins enjoys his freedom or something like that.

[Cinocard]

Originally Posted by Thingle

Yes. It's either there's absolute freedom or there's none.

Yes you are right. Being never has freedom in the first place. You are limited within what you are. But that's undeniably impractical. It has nothing to do with the practical issues and practical sense of freedom in Confucius' teaching.

May you not play philosophy here? If you want to do it, do it correctly. At the least, say "Never liked SOME OF his teaching. Confucians are MOSTLY ritualistically artificial and notoriously two-faced." As there are definitely invaluable lessons in his words. And that's what is left and should be, and is being followed by many even in modern societies. The exact Confucian societies ceased to exist long already.

As least with Confucius, East Asia has a moral foundation times more solid than in the West. A too morally strict society is at least better than a society with no moral Not that I say western culture has no moral, but it may will reach a point close to. East Asia has Confucian as a brake when things turn too bad. Flame me if you want.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Cinocard

As least with Confucius, East Asia has a moral foundation times more solid than in the West.

That's not necessarily a good thing. This "solid" is in fact "rigid" and by the time the West explored the abstract ideas of morality, China got left behind, apparently because the Chinese never bothered straying from the confucian paradigm due to their "practical" leaning.

[Proto]

Like I said, The "Freedom to" is not something I consider as a real freedom. So your points are irrelevant. Yes we are free. What hinders us from finding ways to teleport, understand everything and whatnot? We are only not free if there are expressed prohibitions against it (finding ways), but it does not mean that the "freedom from" does not exist, but is only violated by someone else.

I was actually trying to say that what you are proposing as freedom is almost a contradiction, since its almost a paraphrasing of the phrase "if there is a will there is a way" There are things that no matter how much we strive to, will never be achieved. Like finding an all encompassing theory of everything, becoming a Laplace demon esque demon being, or heck, knowing the spin and the position of a particle at the same time. From the moment we exist we are bound by our own existance. From this POV, freedom is nothing but an illusion, along with free will and all other little similar bunnies.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Proto

I was actually trying to say that what you are proposing as freedom is almost a contradiction, since its almost a paraphrasing of the phrase "if there is a will there is a way" There are things that no matter how much we strive to, will never be achieved. Like finding an all encompassing theory of everything, becoming a Laplace demon esque demon being, or heck, knowing the spin and the position of a particle at the same time. From the moment we exist we are bound by our own existance. From this POV, freedom is nothing but an illusion, along with free will and all other little similar bunnies.

You missed my point. I'm not concerned at all with "if there's a will there's a way" stuff you're talking about. What I was pointing out is that man is free because there's nothing preventing him from doing things, whatever those are.