The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Fakin'It.....

Are you saying...............Mankind survives due to divine intervention, despite running against the evolutionary grain ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Ahso!;1422487 wrote: You've taken a statement regarding biology, pulled it way out of context, re-framed it to suit an absurd argument relating to a philosophical/religious position and then you accuse me of erecting a straw man? Now that's funny.

What I might suggest you do, instead of continuing to pull this thread off course, is to start your own thread laying your argument out properly and see what happens.

This is the last I'll respond to your straw man argument here because I refuse to continue to feed it.
:wah: This thread hasn't really been on course for awhile, but I think we can pull it back with both of your views. In a macro sense, our societal mor'es (I wish I knew how to do the accent thingie) are as much a biological evolution as the complex society of bees, don't you agree? Through natural selection we have tried and rejected a wide variety of societal, um, (patterns? paradigms? designs?) some of which lasted for generations, others for only one, some that work only for small groups, etc.

I think that if we can iron this out then we can naturally tie in to the OP question.
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422495 wrote: I think that if we can iron this out then we can naturally tie in to the OP question.


Fair enough.

"The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep."

IF we were becoming more civilized, individual liberties would be a natural consequence of that evolution. Trust, respect, benevolence, and similar behavior, would have been the successful traits that many generations of offspring would have been displaying to allow our civilized culture to cultivate and protect the individual liberties of its members. If we find that individual liberties once enjoyed are being taken from us, then we must ask if we are actually becoming less civilized. If that is the case, we are devolving. The headlines say . . . . . what?
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Bruv;1422492 wrote: Fakin'It.....

Are you saying...............Mankind survives due to divine intervention, despite running against the evolutionary grain ?


In part, yes.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Fakin'It;1422529 wrote: IF we were becoming more civilized, individual liberties would be a natural consequence of that evolution.
Do you mean that individual liberty would increase, or did you make a typo?
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422531 wrote: Do you mean that individual liberty would increase . . .


Yes, individual liberties would increase IF we were becoming more civilized.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Fakin'It;1422538 wrote: Yes, individual liberties would increase IF we were becoming more civilized.
Devil's Advocate Question: Do you see decreasing gov't assistance as increasing liberty (and becoming more civilized)?
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Fakin'It;1422538 wrote: Yes, individual liberties would increase IF we were becoming more civilized.


I would say the exact opposite.....

Accountable;1422543 wrote: Devil's Advocate Question: Do you see decreasing gov't assistance as increasing liberty (and becoming more civilized)?
I would say the exact opposite.....



And not just because I am contrary.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422543 wrote: Devil's Advocate Question: Do you see decreasing gov't assistance as increasing liberty (and becoming more civilized)?


Increasing the liberty of the individuals? Yes. Off the top of my head:

1) Dependence on the government is not liberty to begin with.

2) Government "compassion" always comes with strings attached.

3) In an increasingly civilized society, there would be less need for the inept, costly and intrusive nature of (government) bureaucracy.

4) Benevolence for the less fortunate among us would be driven by the civilized nature of citizens, not governments.



What do you think?

Bruv;1422555 wrote: I would say the exact opposite.....

I would say the exact opposite.....



And not just because I am contrary.


Why, then?
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Fakin'It;1422573 wrote: Increasing the liberty of the individuals? Yes. Off the top of my head:

1) Dependence on the government is not liberty to begin with. I agree. Dependence is the antonym of liberty.

Fakin'It;1422573 wrote: 2) Government "compassion" always comes with strings attached. I agree, and those strings limit liberty. However, is it more civilized to allow people to fend for themselves without a government safety net?

Fakin'It;1422573 wrote: 3) In an increasingly civilized society, there would be less need for the inept, costly and intrusive nature of (government) bureaucracy. I don't understand. Where does civility come into incompetent bureaucracy? I don't see the relationship.

Fakin'It;1422573 wrote: 4) Benevolence for the less fortunate among us would be driven by the civilized nature of citizens, not governments. Okay. Government assistance programs are not evidence of a civilized society. Yet an argument can be made that if such programs were stopped, we can't be sure that the civilized nature of citizens would pick up the slack.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422555 wrote: [QUOTE=Fakin'It;1422538]Yes, individual liberties would increase IF we were becoming more civilized.I would say the exact opposite.....
So, if individual liberties decrease as a result of being more civilized, would perfect civility mean zero personal liberty? Can't you imagine a scenario where increasing liberty would signal a society becoming more civilized?

Bruv;1422555 wrote: [QUOTE=Accountable;1422543]Devil's Advocate Question: Do you see decreasing gov't assistance as increasing liberty (and becoming more civilized)?I would say the exact opposite.....
Bruv, you say individual liberties would decrease if we were becoming more civilized, yet decreasing gov't assistance would decrease liberty. Surely you don't mean that decreasing gov't assistance makes us more civilised??
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Accountable;1422582 wrote: So, if individual liberties decrease as a result of being more civilized, would perfect civility mean zero personal liberty? Can't you imagine a scenario where increasing liberty would signal a society becoming more civilized?



Bruv, you say individual liberties would decrease if we were becoming more civilized, yet decreasing gov't assistance would decrease liberty. Surely you don't mean that decreasing gov't assistance makes us more civilised??


You are just trying to make my head hurt aint you ?

You want a black or white , yes or no answer................nothing like that coming from me.

You talk as if Governments hand out civility or liberty as if the people and the government are seperate entities.....they are not.

Any half decent system of governance reflects the peoples will, having common sense to look after your people when on hard times (Dependancy ?) is the civilised thing to do, such as unemployment, illness, no long term dependancy should be involved.

The country should be like the family, supporting those who need it, kicking butt of others who require it.

The wording and definitions of what you call that is where we part company.

In your free society the rich pay insurance for health care and unemployment, while the poor jusy suffer.

In my family based society we all pay what is calculated to be fair into a social fund to finance the inevitable problems that arise.Everybody is entitled, nobody is dependant.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422580 wrote: (1) I agree. Dependence is the antonym of liberty.

(2) I agree, and those strings limit liberty. However, is it more civilized to allow people to fend for themselves without a government safety net?

(3) I don't understand. Where does civility come into incompetent bureaucracy? I don't see the relationship.

(4) Okay. Government assistance programs are not evidence of a civilized society. Yet an argument can be made that if such programs were stopped, we can't be sure that the civilized nature of citizens would pick up the slack.


It looks like we're overlapping each other with our questions and answers. Without starting over, please tell me what you think of this. Over time, we could measure the proportionality between successful traits passed on generationally that eventually become common with unsuccessful traits that cease to exist because they are no longer passed on. Humans would evolve toward a state of being civilized in proportion to natural selection pruning away the qualities that had defined him as uncivilized. At some point in this process, leaders would emerge. One of their many responsibilities, as the society became more complex, would be to protect the balance between individual liberties with the traits of the group that had survived the evolution of uncivilized to civilized. It is logical to assume that civilized people would not empower uncivilized people to safeguard these rights. From this, I respond to your points (I numbered them for clarity) this way:

(2) There is no government safety net as in a civilized society with civilized leadership, the citizens are the safety net.

(3) Civility does not come into incompetent bureaucracy. Uncivilized societies empower uncivilized individuals, the breeding ground for uncivilized governments.

(4) The evolution of a civilized government, empowered by and a reflection of a civilized society, would not have created programs which resulted in dependence in the first place. As the civilized citizens are already the safety net, there is no slack to pick up.

IF we were becoming more civilized, our individual liberties would not be threatened.

Sorry, this is longer than I planned. And The Wife is a real pain!!! :-5
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Part of the problem is probably that the very word is ambiguous. From dictionary.com (emphasis mine):

civ·i·lized [siv-uh-lahyzd] Show IPA

adjective

1. having an advanced or humane culture, society, etc.

2. polite; well-bred; refined.

3. of or pertaining to civilized people: The civilized world must fight ignorance.

4. easy to manage or control; well organized or ordered: The car is quiet and civilized, even in sharp turns.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422593 wrote: You are just trying to make my head hurt aint you ?:wah: I know what you mean

Bruv;1422593 wrote: You want a black or white , yes or no answer................nothing like that coming from me.Nah. Just consistency. It bugs me when I find myself being inconsistent. I figure that either I haven't thought through one or both positions thoroughly. I invariably find that either (1) I don't really hold one (or both) opinions, and have to adjust, or (2) the two positions have a common thread that isn't obvious at the first look.

Bryn has prompted #1 with me on a couple of occassions. I suspect that your post fits #2 this time.

Bruv;1422593 wrote: You talk as if Governments hand out civility or liberty as if the people and the government are seperate entities.....they are not.

Any half decent system of governance reflects the peoples will, having common sense to look after your people when on hard times (Dependancy ?) is the civilised thing to do, such as unemployment, illness, no long term dependancy should be involved.

The country should be like the family, supporting those who need it, kicking butt of others who require it.

The wording and definitions of what you call that is where we part company.

In your free society the rich pay insurance for health care and unemployment, while the poor jusy suffer.

In my family based society we all pay what is calculated to be fair into a social fund to finance the inevitable problems that arise.Everybody is entitled, nobody is dependant.
We're closer to agreement than disagreement. In my years of conversations here in the Garden, I've found that you Brits generally see charity and charity organizations in a negative light, and that charitable organizations are a sign of inadequate government assistance. I'm sure that's oversimplified (as is your description of my free society), but it's a definite difference in our cultures.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Fakin'It;1422626 wrote: It looks like we're overlapping each other with our questions and answers. Without starting over, please tell me what you think of this. Over time, we could measure the proportionality between successful traits passed on generationally that eventually become common with unsuccessful traits that cease to exist because they are no longer passed on. Humans would evolve toward a state of being civilized in proportion to natural selection pruning away the qualities that had defined him as uncivilized. At some point in this process, leaders would emerge. One of their many responsibilities, as the society became more complex, would be to protect the balance between individual liberties with the traits of the group that had survived the evolution of uncivilized to civilized. It is logical to assume that civilized people would not empower uncivilized people to safeguard these rights. This only makes sense if civility was and end (a purpose) of evolution. I'm not convinced that it is. I think that civility is simply a protocol we have adopted as a means to the real ends, which is survival and procreation. It's our version of the Birds of Paradise mating dances.

Fakin'It;1422626 wrote: (2) There is no government safety net as in a civilized society with civilized leadership, the citizens are the safety net.

[...]

(4) The evolution of a civilized government, empowered by and a reflection of a civilized society, would not have created programs which resulted in dependence in the first place. As the civilized citizens are already the safety net, there is no slack to pick up.You're leaping to a utopian ideal. What about the years (generations? centuries) between now and then?

Fakin'It;1422626 wrote: Sorry, this is longer than I planned. And The Wife is a real pain!!! :-5
:wah: My beloved is like that, too, sometimes.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

I believe I can conclude that the originator of that phrase, "The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep," somehow equated increased government programs and government assistance with being more civilised.

I think it's self-evident that the more government, um, involvement a society has, the less liberty the members of that society enjoys. We can debate that, of course.

Can we agree that being civilised is completely independent of what kind of government a society has?
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422639 wrote: Part of the problem is probably that the very word is ambiguous.


No doubt. Perhaps that is what drives the conversation. :yh_wink



Accountable;1422643 wrote: This only makes sense if civility was and end (a purpose) of evolution. I'm not convinced that it is. I think that civility is simply a protocol we have adopted as a means to the real ends, which is survival and procreation.


This may be so. But, as survival and procreation (which are also individual liberties) are increasingly at risk, it is fair to ask why evolution has not better equipped us to obey the two obvious results of natural selection.

You're leaping to a utopian ideal. What about the years (generations? centuries) between now and then?




I remain an optimist, sigh, though that is becoming an increasingly strong current to swim against. I wonder how many more generations of arms escalation, terrorism, poisoned food and water driven by profit, and so on, will be given to us to reach the utopian ideal.

:wah: My beloved is like that, too, sometimes.


By "My Wife," I'm referring to the server errors that plague my posts!!! :-5



Accountable;1422644 wrote:

Can we agree that being civilised is completely independent of what kind of government a society has?


Sorry, no. A people get the government they deserve. A society is represented and governed as it wills. The government is as civilized or uncivilized as the gene pool that empowered it.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Fakin'It;1422663 wrote: Sorry, no. A people get the government they deserve. A society is represented and governed as it wills. The government is as civilized or uncivilized as the gene pool that empowered it.The Germans of the 1930s? The Pols after WW2? Did the Cherokee nation deserve the US federal gov't?

All rhetorical, of course, but wouldn't you say that most people you know are more civilized than the politicians who run our government?
Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1422668 wrote: The Germans of the 1930s?


Martin Niemoller's "First they came . . . " quote persuades me that this society was not without some responsibility. Nobody deserved the Third Reich, of course, but their ascension did not take place in a vacuum.

The Pols after WW2? Did the Cherokee nation deserve the US federal gov't?


Good examples.

All rhetorical, of course, but wouldn't you say that most people you know are more civilized than the politicians who run our government?


Of course, I only hang out with civilized people! :wah: But, that is a small sample size and, given the career "appointments" of many politicians, you wonder why civilized people keep sending them back.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Accountable;1422644 wrote: I believe I can conclude that the originator of that phrase, "The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep," somehow equated increased government programs and government assistance with being more civilised.

I think it's self-evident that the more government, um, involvement a society has, the less liberty the members of that society enjoys. We can debate that, of course.

Can we agree that being civilised is completely independent of what kind of government a society has?
Bump for Bruv.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Accountable;1422737 wrote: Bump for Bruv.
Oh sorry was that for me ?

I think the definitions and perhaps the priority given to certain words is the crux of the argument here.

Let me give a 'for instance'

It is civilised to go through a form of marriage, which curtails your individual freedom, but it is something you enter into freely.

You both exchange individual freedom for something else mutually beneficial, for the two involved and society as a whole.

So extended families, as a part of society, within their own group, give up individual liberty for the good of all in that group.

Isn't society and villages and towns and countries just an extension of the same idea ?

Did we decide what civilised means yet ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422744 wrote: Oh sorry was that for me ?

I think the definitions and perhaps the priority given to certain words is the crux of the argument here.

Let me give a 'for instance'

It is civilised to go through a form of marriage, which curtails your individual freedom, but it is something you enter into freely.

You both exchange individual freedom for something else mutually beneficial, for the two involved and society as a whole.

So extended families, as a part of society, within their own group, give up individual liberty for the good of all in that group.

Isn't society and villages and towns and countries just an extension of the same idea ?

Did we decide what civilised means yet ?
I don't think so because you enter marriage as an adult and coequal partner. If you don't want to participate then there is no penalty for declining (other than losing the relationship). You just can't claim the same for society and villages and towns and countries.

and no, I don't think we've ironed out what civilised means, either. I really think we've erred over the years in that some of us don't think it necessary to be civil, yet we expect the government to legislate civility upon others.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Accountable;1422746 wrote: I don't think so because you enter marriage as an adult and coequal partner. If you don't want to participate then there is no penalty for declining (other than losing the relationship). You just can't claim the same for society and villages and towns and countries.

and no, I don't think we've ironed out what civilised means, either. I really think we've erred over the years in that some of us don't think it necessary to be civil, yet we expect the government to legislate civility upon others.


So we haven't defined civilised or know what particular liberties are so sacrosanct as to warrent this discussion.

Any social interaction is a compromise, civilisation is the ultimate compromise.

If you want the benefits of somebody baking your bread, somebody else caring for your medical needs, roads to enable fresh milk deliveries (getting my drift?) then you have to forgo the more antisocial 'Liberties'
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422806 wrote: So we haven't defined civilised or know what particular liberties are so sacrosanct as to warrent this discussion.

Any social interaction is a compromise, civilisation is the ultimate compromise.

If you want the benefits of somebody baking your bread, somebody else caring for your medical needs, roads to enable fresh milk deliveries (getting my drift?) then you have to forgo the more antisocial 'Liberties'But just as we need to compromise and give up some liberties in order to be civilized, there is a tipping point where too many liberties are lost and civility is lost as well, don't you agree? There's a balancing point. Each society has to find its own, but I don't think anyone would say that the ultimate in civilisation is when no one has liberty.
User avatar
halfway
Posts: 600
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 12:52 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by halfway »

America has proven that she is willing to give up all liberties in the name of security. This has been by both design and human nature.

We are proving that we are NOT strong enough to maintain our liberties in a republic.
My Journal of a New Endeavor
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by AnneBoleyn »

It fascinates me how easily we have all given up our privacy to the internet. The privacy battle is over, we lost. The important thing (?) is that we are all having so much fun.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

halfway;1422836 wrote: America has proven that she is willing to give up all liberties in the name of security. This has been by both design and human nature.

We are proving that we are NOT strong enough to maintain our liberties in a republic.
That's certainly the way it appears today. We really seem to be willing to give up anything intangible (conceptual?) to keep whatever material we can.
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

AnneBoleyn;1422837 wrote: It fascinates me how easily we have all given up our privacy to the internet. The privacy battle is over, we lost. The important thing (?) is that we are all having so much fun.
I agree. Part of it is that we've somehow gotten the idea that if it's not written in the Constitution then it's not really a right.
User avatar
AnneBoleyn
Posts: 6632
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by AnneBoleyn »

Accountable;1422839 wrote: I agree. Part of it is that we've somehow gotten the idea that if it's not written in the Constitution then it's not really a right.


I love it when we agree! :-4
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Accountable;1422829 wrote: But just as we need to compromise and give up some liberties in order to be civilized, there is a tipping point where too many liberties are lost and civility is lost as well, don't you agree? There's a balancing point. Each society has to find its own, but I don't think anyone would say that the ultimate in civilisation is when no one has liberty.


Why do people, and you are guilty too, presuming one thing results in another?

Why should the loss of liberty equal the loss of civility ?

In fact it might be the exact opposite.

And if everybody has no liberty, then that is not civilised in the slightest.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422863 wrote: Why do people, and you are guilty too, presuming one thing results in another?

Why should the loss of liberty equal the loss of civility ?I didn't say that. In fact I said exactly the opposite in the first clause of my post.

Bruv;1422863 wrote: In fact it might be the exact opposite.

And if everybody has no liberty, then that is not civilised in the slightest.Then we agree in principle, as I said. We just disagree on the balancing point.
Bruv
Posts: 12181
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:05 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Bruv »

Accountable;1422885 wrote: Then we agree in principle, as I said. We just disagree on the balancing point.


So all we need to do is draw up a Constitution from scratch for the modern day.

Who wants to start ?

I expect we shall start arguing about the right to bear arms.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Bruv;1422896 wrote: So all we need to do is draw up a Constitution from scratch for the modern day.

Who wants to start ?

I expect we shall start arguing about the right to bear arms.:wah:
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

This is what I'm getting at. Losing too much liberty goes against civilization.

Fakin'It
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 11:30 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Fakin'It »

Accountable;1423228 wrote: This is what I'm getting at. Losing too much liberty goes against civilization.




The inevitable abuse of power at the expense of individual liberties. Liberties which pose no threat to true public servants, but which become a vulnerability to tyrants.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Ahso! »

Accountable;1418600 wrote: "The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep."

This was a quote from a member of another forum. He actually wrote it with an air of "of course, so what?"

What say you?



**I'd like to add a poll, but that option is apparently gone. **Need context. How about a link to the thread in question?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Ahso!;1423286 wrote: Need context. No, you don't. There are over 80 posts to give you something to comment on, and you are intelligent enough to place your own caveats on your opinions. If that's not enough, be an audience.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Ahso! »

Accountable;1423293 wrote: No, you don't. There are over 80 posts to give you something to comment on, and you are intelligent enough to place your own caveats on your opinions. If that's not enough, be an audience.Your ability to perceive the intent of others as well as your appreciation for diverse thought is suspect. Suit yourself, I'm not going to plead with you to let go of your obvious need to control the dialogue. C'est la vie. Enjoy your tunnel-vision.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

coward.
Ahso!
Posts: 10215
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:38 pm

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Ahso! »

Is this a competition or something for you? I thought it was an exploration and exchange of thoughts based on something someone wrote on a forum. Provide the conversation so we can see how the statement was framed and judge for ourselves why he said what he said. Only a right-fighter wouldn't make the information available.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,”

Voltaire



I have only one thing to do and that's

Be the wave that I am and then

Sink back into the ocean

Fiona Apple
User avatar
Accountable
Posts: 24818
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am

The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.

Post by Accountable »

Accountable;1418600 wrote: "The more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep."

This was a quote from a member of another forum. He actually wrote it with an air of "of course, so what?"

What say you?



**I'd like to add a poll, but that option is apparently gone. **


Ahso!;1423308 wrote: Is this a competition or something for you? I thought it was an exploration and exchange of thoughts based on something someone wrote on a forum. Provide the conversation so we can see how the statement was framed and judge for ourselves why he said what he said. Only a right-fighter wouldn't make the information available.
My apologies. I can see how "What say you?" in this context might be interpreted as asking if you agree with me about the air he displayed. I wasn't asking that. I was asking if you agree that the more civilized we become, the less individual liberties we get to keep.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy”