PDA

View Full Version : freedom in this society


LHX
05-17-2006, 09:16 AM
------ALERT------


you are allowed to be free in this society as long as you remain productive toward maintaining the current structure that is in place

as soon as you lose the ability to be productive
or
as soon as you disagree with the current structure
you are no longer allowed to be free



------END OF TRANSMISSION------



you may now return to your regularly scheduled tasks

arto
05-17-2006, 11:03 AM
i wholeheartedly agree

denaturat
05-17-2006, 02:08 PM
what about in an alternative society that many here propose. in a society where people live at the subsistance level, farm their own food, take as much as they need, and otherwise live in leisure. wouldn't someone who wanted to create something bigger, something that requires work and divsion of labour, would his freedom be constrained? there is no ideal society where every body is positively free.

LHX
05-17-2006, 02:30 PM
what about in an alternative society that many here propose. in a society where people live at the subsistance level, farm their own food, take as much as they need, and otherwise live in leisure. wouldn't someone who wanted to create something bigger, something that requires work and divsion of labour, would his freedom be constrained? there is no ideal society where every body is positively free.

lmao

where somebody imposes his desire on other people?

'hmmm
i feel like getting people to do my work for me today'


i dont know if it would need to be constrained seeing as it dont really make much sense

denaturat
05-17-2006, 02:33 PM
lmao

where somebody imposes his desire on other people?

'hmmm
i feel like getting people to do my work for me today'


i dont know if it would need to be constrained seeing as it dont really make much sense

no, I mean pay people for a days work. in your post revolutionsry society there is no money, thus a constraint on scientists, engineers ro scholars to work on big projects. unless you would be willing to work for free?

LHX
05-17-2006, 02:38 PM
no, I mean pay people for a days work. in your post revolutionsry society there is no money, thus a constraint on scientists, engineers ro scholars to work on big projects. unless you would be willing to work for free?

what are the goals of engineers
scientists
and scholars?


also -
what is the difference between somebody who is an engineer and somebody who isnt an engineer?

denaturat
05-17-2006, 02:41 PM
create things that have opractical and non-practical applications

LHX
05-17-2006, 08:02 PM
create things that have opractical and non-practical applications

is practicality subjective?

denaturat
05-17-2006, 11:20 PM
is practicality subjective?

is your physical well being subjective?

LHX
05-17-2006, 11:50 PM
is your physical well being subjective?

is the criteria that composes physical well-being subjective?

denaturat
05-18-2006, 12:20 AM
is the criteria that composes physical well-being subjective?

?

LHX
05-18-2006, 09:17 AM
?

are you dodging questions?

IN YOUR VIEW
what are the criteria of physical well-being?

and
is it a subjective view?

CherChezLaMarauder
05-18-2006, 10:06 AM
balance, people. balance. Refer to the symbolism thread. Prosperity will only exist in the expense of poverty and vice versa. with the unlimited resources we have along with human nature, it will never ever be an equal playing field

Frontal Lobotomy
05-18-2006, 11:14 AM
Human nature and capitalism are seperate entities. Where one is like, pre-condition, the other is a result of social constructs and various forms of conditioning. I see where you're going with the whole rich/poor-yin/yang idea, but i dunno, should anyone have to suffer in order for someone else to benefit?

LHX
05-18-2006, 11:31 AM
should anyone have to suffer in order for someone else to benefit?

no

99.999999997% certainty

CherChezLaMarauder
05-18-2006, 12:24 PM
Human nature and capitalism are seperate entities. Where one is like, pre-condition, the other is a result of social constructs and various forms of conditioning. I see where you're going with the whole rich/poor-yin/yang idea, but i dunno, should anyone have to suffer in order for someone else to benefit?


Uh, yea. Human nature is a significant part. How many possesions you have do you actually need? how much of that could of been given to the less fortunate?

ØDESSA
05-18-2006, 12:25 PM
Society sucks.

Frontal Lobotomy
05-18-2006, 12:38 PM
Uh, yea. Human nature is a significant part. How many possesions you have do you actually need? how much of that could of been given to the less fortunate?

Well, personally, I don't have much, the most valuable thing i own is an Xbox, which I believe could get me £20 if I'm lucky. As for those less fortunate, what makes you think I'm not already 'less fortunate'?
I still can't link capitalism and human nature though. Its true that human nature might be seen as some sort of catalyst for the promenance of capitalism, as the human pre-condition is to be the alpha of any given group. But then, if we're only talking about our base instincts, surely monetary wealth is immaterial? Desire and survival are two entirely different bodies.

CherChezLaMarauder
05-18-2006, 12:56 PM
Indeed survival and desire are different. The less fortunate don't know how to type, hell they have a hard time reading what's typed here. Less fortunate wouldn't know or care anything about Xbox. Less fortunate rely on hand-me-down socks and shoes.

denaturat
05-18-2006, 01:43 PM
are you dodging questions?

IN YOUR VIEW
what are the criteria of physical well-being?

and
is it a subjective view?

no, I am not dodging questions. your question was not clear. physical well being includes health

LHX
05-18-2006, 02:07 PM
no, I am not dodging questions. your question was not clear. physical well being includes health

keep going
elaborate

what do you mean by health? or physical well-being?



are you saying that the goal of engineers and scientists is to create health?

im not tryin to put words in your mouth
but
that seems to be the conclusion that you are suggesting

denaturat
05-18-2006, 02:21 PM
keep going
elaborate

what do you mean by health? or physical well-being?



are you saying that the goal of engineers and scientists is to create health?

im not tryin to put words in your mouth
but
that seems to be the conclusion that you are suggesting

well, medicine is concerned with the wellness of the body, often that requires engineering because engineers create technology that aids doctor. engineers also design buildings that make you live comfortably and design sewage systems for cities, irrigation systems, drinking water systems. etc. those are things that you cannot creat without money, that is one example of difficulties with the world where everyone just grows their own food and otherwise does what they please.

LHX
05-18-2006, 03:31 PM
well, medicine is concerned with the wellness of the body, often that requires engineering because engineers create technology that aids doctor. engineers also design buildings that make you live comfortably and design sewage systems for cities, irrigation systems, drinking water systems. etc. those are things that you cannot creat without money, that is one example of difficulties with the world where everyone just grows their own food and otherwise does what they please.

irrigation reduced to its base form involves digging paths

all the other topics have been discussed at length in other threads
and
i disagree with you on all points


everybody is a doctor
medicine is food

buildings dont make anything comfortable
but
the illusion of comfort can be found in buildings



any difficulty with drinking water is man made

denaturat
05-18-2006, 06:45 PM
irrigation reduced to its base form involves digging paths

all the other topics have been discussed at length in other threads
and
i disagree with you on all points


everybody is a doctor
medicine is food

buildings dont make anything comfortable
but
the illusion of comfort can be found in buildings



any difficulty with drinking water is man made

well, that is not really an argument but a counter claim. a naive counter claim that does not rest on a solid foundation as I am attempting to demonstrate to you.


general response to the wu-revolutionaries on this web site:

it's easy taking the position that our current political system is so corrupt that the only to deal with it is to overthrow it. the citites are falling apart, the history in the text books is all lies and conspiracy, the news are all capitalist propaganda, the courts are run by some secret society like the masons. so it is pointless for you to do anything, to learn anything and participate since you will achieve nothing. just sit back and criticise everything. say that the system keeps you down, but god forbid you get off your ass and see if you can be successful in this system. you don't need to be 'productive' in capitalism. at least go to school, get degrees and become teachers or professors, if you think you got some intellectual skills. who says you have to work in a cubicle.

but then maybe you got no motivation to do anything all. maybe all these revolutionary theories are just a great excuse to sit back and smoke a joint and spit theories that make sense only to those whose mind has been "expended" by that wonderous drug which solves all man's problems.

LHX
05-18-2006, 07:12 PM
well, that is not really an argument but a counter claim. a naive counter claim that does not rest on a solid foundation as I am attempting to demonstrate to you.


general response to the wu-revolutionaries on this web site:

it's easy taking the position that our current political system is so corrupt that the only to deal with it is to overthrow it. the citites are falling apart, the history in the text books is all lies and conspiracy, the news are all capitalist propaganda, the courts are run by some secret society like the masons. so it is pointless for you to do anything, to learn anything and participate since you will achieve nothing. just sit back and criticise everything. say that the system keeps you down, but god forbid you get off your ass and see if you can be successful in this system. you don't need to be 'productive' in capitalism. at least go to school, get degrees and become teachers or professors, if you think you got some intellectual skills. who says you have to work in a cubicle.

but then maybe you got no motivation to do anything all. maybe all these revolutionary theories are just a great excuse to sit back and smoke a joint and spit theories that make sense only to those whose mind has been "expended" by that wonderous drug which solves all man's problems.

some of us dont smoke
drink
eat meat
or jerk off

whats with the sweeping generalizations?


lmao @ 'god forbid you get off your ass and see if you can be successful in the system'

some of us have seen luxury
and had our eyes open to how it leads to decay


success in this system depends on contributing to oppression

there is no other way to look at it



dont worry
a change is in the air

denaturat
05-18-2006, 08:14 PM
some of us dont smoke
drink
eat meat
or jerk off

whats with the sweeping generalizations?


lmao @ 'god forbid you get off your ass and see if you can be successful in the system'

some of us have seen luxury
and had our eyes open to how it leads to decay


success in this system depends on contributing to oppression

there is no other way to look at it



dont worry
a change is in the air


with stricter regulation you can adress opression or inequality. however we would have to give up cheap commodities. the result would be that those commodities would be more expensive, and people would have less crap. I am happy with that. Just because I have no problem with capitalism and commerialism does not mean that I am a materialist. I am content with living on less amenities as long as others can also share in them, and so long as they are produced in an a way that has a minimal impact on the environment. the trouble is that people in the developed world place a higher priority on cheap crap and give little consideration to the consequences of such cheap production. you need to change peoples attitudes about such issues which would in turn facilitate good lpolicy and legislation.

..and I can assure you that there will be no revolution. thankfully there is not enough people who can bring it about. if you look at revolutions in history, you will see that north america does not meet the necessary pre-conditions.

LHX
05-18-2006, 09:28 PM
with stricter regulation you can adress opression or inequality. however we would have to give up cheap commodities. the result would be that those commodities would be more expensive, and people would have less crap. I am happy with that. Just because I have no problem with capitalism and commerialism does not mean that I am a materialist. I am content with living on less amenities as long as others can also share in them, and so long as they are produced in an a way that has a minimal impact on the environment. the trouble is that people in the developed world place a higher priority on cheap crap and give little consideration to the consequences of such cheap production. you need to change peoples attitudes about such issues which would in turn facilitate good lpolicy and legislation.

..and I can assure you that there will be no revolution. thankfully there is not enough people who can bring it about. if you look at revolutions in history, you will see that north america does not meet the necessary pre-conditions.

its clear we agree on aims

however i find your reasoning and proposals to have fundamental flaws

denaturat
05-18-2006, 09:49 PM
its clear we agree on aims

however i find your reasoning and proposals to have fundamental flaws

coincidenatally I find your reasoning fundamentally flawed. but i already pointed out some problems with your present perceptions and proposed solutions. maybe you can tell me where you think I err in my arguments

LHX
05-18-2006, 10:10 PM
sure

1 - it is not possible to control this planet
2 - the current system relies on the premise that this planet and the resources of this planet can some how be controlled

stricter regulation only causes more problems down the road


what reason do you have to believe that other people have a good vision for the direction of society?

look at the situation we are in now


the only redeeming quality of this society is that nobody wants it to be in a bad situation

the reality is that this system is self-destructive and continuously trips over itself



you are right
there will be no revolution like we have already seen in the past

denaturat
05-18-2006, 11:06 PM
sure

1 - it is not possible to control this planet
2 - the current system relies on the premise that this planet and the resources of this planet can some how be controlled

stricter regulation only causes more problems down the road


what reason do you have to believe that other people have a good vision for the direction of society?

look at the situation we are in now


the only redeeming quality of this society is that nobody wants it to be in a bad situation

the reality is that this system is self-destructive and continuously trips over itself



you are right
there will be no revolution like we have already seen in the past

shit...I wrote an essay size response to your post, but got the "invalid thread specified" message:thumbdwn: no time and energy to go through it again. we'll continue later.

http://www.twiyo.net/lobster/frustration.gif

LHX
05-18-2006, 11:08 PM
shit...I wrote an essay size response to your post, but got the "invalid thread specified" message:thumbdwn: no time and energy to go through it again. we'll continue later.



sall good bro


keep it half short and twice strong



peace

denaturat
05-18-2006, 11:16 PM
sall good bro


keep it half short and twice strong



peace

lol..I come out all strong. but when you talk about solutions for mankind, bro, you can't explain that shit in a paragraph. :learning:

LHX
05-19-2006, 01:10 PM
this society is a trap
they use fear as bait

http://bbs.fuckedcompany.com/icons/potd.gif

this is the correct summary of the situation

CherChezLaMarauder
05-19-2006, 01:13 PM
fear is self inflicted. Whoever falls into those traps are weak minded and therefore serve no purpose for themselves

LHX
05-19-2006, 02:59 PM
fear is self inflicted. Whoever falls into those traps are weak minded and therefore serve no purpose for themselves

this is also true

suggests that a society based on fear is also weak and serves no purpose

LHX
05-19-2006, 03:47 PM
sort of like being led into a war zone

Prince Rai
05-19-2006, 04:02 PM
this is also true

suggests that a society based on fear is also weak and serves no purpose

are we at our strongest when we are alone then?
should we shun society?

LHX
05-19-2006, 04:55 PM
are we at our strongest when we are alone then?
should we shun society?

we are at our strongest when we find a society not based on fear

a society is composed of a group of people who communicate with one another

my hunch is that we should shun a society that is falling apart
and
in the process
a society with a firm foundation can be established