I Am On A Quest

[SpayAndNeuterLibs]

I am on a quest to better my knowledge. I what to understand what makes us tick. Why do some of us believe in a higher power? Why some of us don't? Why do some including me, believe in individual resposibility? Why do other's believe in a communal type society? :help:

 

[Dirk]

I am on a quest to better my knowledge. I what to understand what makes us tick. Why do some of us believe in a higher power? Why some of us don't? Why do some including me, believe in individual resposibility? Why do other's believe in a communal type society? :help:

I believe that both individuality and communality are concepts to be treasured and don't need to be mutually exclusive.

 

[myp]

My (brief) response to the OP: In terms of philosophy, a lot of it relies on what one thinks is fair. The two predominant ideas are probably libertarianism vs egalitarianism. Essentially, libertarians value equality in process as they believe that any ends reached are the fair, so long as the process by which they came about was equal. Egalitarians, on the other hand, believe that the ends are what matter and that equality of process is not the important matter, but the end result is. Whether one leans towards egalitarianism or libertarianism (or some other idea- a meritocracy perhaps) mostly depends on how one is raised and sees the world in my opinion.

I believe that both individuality and communality are concepts to be treasured and don't need to be mutually exclusive.

They are opposites though so while you may treasure both, in practice you can not have both completely.

 

[SpayAndNeuterLibs]

I believe that both individuality and communality are concepts to be treasured and don't need to be mutually exclusive.

Individuality and Communism is a 180 degree concept. How can you be self- accountable, while participateing in the communism of socialite based political correctness. While crying out in acceptance of conservatism?:help:

 

[David]

Individuality and Communism is a 180 degree concept. How can you be self- accountable, while participateing in the communism of socialite based political correctness. While crying out in acceptance of conservatism?:help:

He's not a communist?

 

[Dirk]

They are opposites though so while you may treasure both, in practice you can not have both completely.

Not at all! I would say they are quite complimentary.

Individuality and Communism is a 180 degree concept.

What comrade David said:

He's not a communist?

How can you be self- accountable, while participateing in the communism of socialite based political correctness. While crying out in acceptance of conservatism?:help:

I reject political correctness. I reject conservatism.

People should be individually responsible, and if they are going to live alongside others and participate in society, like sane people do, then they must accept that they also have a social responsibility to others. It's called maturity.

 

[myp]

Not at all! I would say they are quite complimentary.

Care to elaborate? Communality is collectivism, individualism is the lack of collectivism.

 

[Dirk]

Care to elaborate? Communality is collectivism, individualism is the lack of collectivism.

Individualism is stupid. Individuality's where it's at! People work best together, and every person's uniqueness should be respected and accepted. Working and living alongside one another makes it even more important to recognise one another as their own person. Rather than have a hierarchical system where people work for a minority, the ones below are dehumanised and risk losing their status as individuals, becoming merely cogs in a machine.

You could try individualist isolationism. I guarantee it will be a complete failure.

 

[myp]

No one is arguing for individualist isolationism (at least I am not) but individualism is not that. If you just reject individualism from the get go, you are also willing to let an individual's freedom to do as he pleases slip away as well.

Most individuals realize that working together can be beneficial at times and as such they would likely work together. I just want them to be able to make that decision, not have some collectivist organization force it upon them. Furthermore, collectivist ideas tend to group people based on race, sex, color, intelligence, wealth, etc. and in the process people's individuality is often forgotten as well.

 

[Dirk]

No one is arguing for individualist isolationism (at least I am not) but individualism is not that. If you just reject individualism from the get go, you are also willing to let an individual's freedom to do as he pleases slip away as well.

I presumed so because of the logical etymology of the term individualism.

People may be completely free to do what they like, as far as i'm concerned. If they divorce themselves from society, they are idiots. There is what is very much approaching a need to work together, to some extent.

Most individuals realize that working together can be beneficial at times and as such they would likely work together. I just want them to be able to make that decision, not have some collectivist organization force it upon them. Furthermore, collectivist ideas tend to group people based on race, sex, color, intelligence, wealth, etc. and in the process people's individuality is often forgotten as well.

Collectivist organisation is not necessarily coercive. It can be achieved through cooperation, communication and free federation.

Just one reason i am an egalitarian. I'm very big on equality. And on individuality. It's important we respect people for who they are, and don't treat them differently, based on petty prejudices and brash generalisations.

 

[myp]

I am fine with collectivist organizations created by consenting individuals. That is individualism allowing bubbles of cooperation and that is great. That is a very libertarian ideal. Individuality is also a libertarian ideal and not an egalitarian one at all.

Egalitarianism focuses on equality as an end result. Traditionally it has been run through coercion and collectivism that overshadows individuality. It has created the very prejudices you speak of. Not only do I think that is unfair, but the ends are never reached- it is just not possible, not to mention time doesn't stop. I am for equality in process, not an impossible and unwanted (in my opinion) equal end.

 

[David]

I reject political correctness. I reject conservatism.

I agree with he 1st, not so much the 2nd.

 

[Dirk]

I am fine with collectivist organizations created by consenting individuals. That is individualism allowing bubbles of cooperation and that is great. That is a very libertarian ideal. Individuality is also a libertarian ideal and not an egalitarian one at all.

Egalitarianism focuses on equality as an end result. Traditionally it has been run through coercion and collectivism that overshadows individuality. It has created the very prejudices you speak of. Not only do I think that is unfair, but the ends are never reached- it is just not possible, not to mention time doesn't stop. I am for equality in process, not an impossible and unwanted (in my opinion) equal end.

There are no end results, i agree. I am an egalitarian because i want equality. I am also a libertarian. Really, they're not mutually exclusive! I love individuality, i love equality. That's not difficult to understand.

I agree with he 1st, not so much the 2nd.

I know there are many definitions for the term. I disagree with the political science definition. I won't go into it.

Let's have a look at what Wiki has to say, though i respect it's not awesomely accurate:

In contemporary American politics, it is often associated with the Republican Party.

No.

Most conservatives agree with most of these principles:

Let's have them.

belief in God,

No. Not any more.

capitalism,

No.

anti-communism,

No.

American exceptionalism,

No.

a strong military,

No.

smaller federal government,

Yes.

and lower taxes.

Yes.

Many conservatives believe that America should support Judeo-Christian values.

No.

Russell Kirk included preservation of moral order and of tradition as conservative principles.

No.

What's interesting is that none but the last of these is included in the political science definition. Which i also disagree with.

 

[David]

Let's see...

belief in God,

Yes.

capitalism,

Hell, no!

anti-communism,

Yes.

American exceptionalism,

No.

a strong military,

Yes, yes, yes!

smaller federal government,

Yes.

and lower taxes.

Depends.

 

[Seer Travis Truman]

I am on a quest to better my knowledge. I what to understand what makes us tick. Why do some of us believe in a higher power? Why some of us don't? Why do some including me, believe in individual resposibility? Why do other's believe in a communal type society? :help:

You are on no such legitimate quest at all. You don't value or want Truth. If you did, a whole mountain of Truth is available via My Superior website.

You ask about individual responsibility, yet you refuse to analyze and look at it. You dont even discuss that on My thread and instead sneak over here to ask so that you can get the wrong answer you crave.

 

[adagio]

Hey Spay,

If you happen into the LF ask Gailybee or one of the others why my posting privileges have been removed.

Adagio

 

[linganth]

Hey Spay,

If you happen into the LF ask Gailybee or one of the others why my posting privileges have been removed.

Adagio

Hey Adagio,
It is because you posted another websites URL (this one) on a thread. But I am glad you did! This is hornmeister!

 

[adagio]

Is that it?? LOL>.....No shit. I was posting to Pugs telling him that I was really sick of the racist crap and the lack of any kind of debate and I didn't think I could continue posting there, and I'd found this place. I guess you saw the post. And...I guess they made my decision for me. Man, I'm glad to see you Horn. It's amazing. I post the URL to this place and get booted, but a cockroach like JT can use the N word and get away with anything and still post away. Screw em. I think this place has more going for it.