[deleted]
Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
21–30 of 32 posts
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#22Is this really the best definition of freedom this fellow could muster?
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#23> Enlightenment "freedom" is only the freedom to perfectly follow the whims of impulses and vices indiscriminately. Highly convenient definition if one wants to slander something. Aka, a straw-man argument. Actually, freedom means finding a balance between vice and virtue that suits ones personality. With too much virtue one would do serious activity too much, basically overworking oneself. With too much vice one doe…
” With too much virtue one would do serious activity too much, basically overworking oneself.”
This also seems like a strawman of what virtue is (because in the west work is considered virtuous and leisure is not, which is unfortunate ).
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#24"God will set you free". Got it. Now which god?
Any god of a tradition that's been successfully around for a few thousand years would be a good start. Even if you don't believe in a deity, the traditions of a successful culture are worth considering given we only have a few years to figure out what a good life looks like before we die.
Honestly, zoroastrism does not appeal to me very much.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#25While an interesting topic, the author needs to tone down the sexism before it seems like it deserves a place on HackerNews
I suspect your the nature of your objection is something you can't quite grasp yourself. Calling it sexist seems a safe way of attack. It is one thing to know that we like or don't like something. Much harder is understanding why. Usually we give the first acceptable "reason" that comes to mind rather than trying to figure it out. Figuring out why we like or not often takes a number of thought experiments.
> Calling it sexist seems a safe way of attack.
Not really, this article is sexist. But alright, this is not reason enough to dismiss it.
The illustration of nihilism show a complete misunderstanding of what nihilism is (the enlightment strawman is pretty intersting too).
Theologians usually do have an education in philosophy and in history, so the man writing this is probably not one. I'm not saying only theologians have the right to reflect on religion, but they are often more thoughtfull than random bloggers.
Although i was educated with classical/continental philosophy, i did read a lot of analytic philosophy, and if the writer is American or from the commonwealth, he was exposed to analytic philosophy (or at least more than i was). And that shows in the development of his article.
But before you craft, you should learn from your master and from your peers, and the writer pretty much ignored all modern analytical works and wrote something that is so behind his time that it becomes interesting to read and to understand.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#26I'm not a philosopher by trade, so I probably have this all wrong, but if we're going to be enslaved to something anyway, isn't freedom at least the ability to choose what to be enslaved by? Virtue or vice, impulses or careful planning (and the consequences of these things)... your choice, not someone else's?
You can give multiple meaning to freedom:
1: i am legally allowed to do X
2: I am legally allowed to do X and you are forbidden to prevent me from doing X
and you can even push to this one:
3: I am legally allowed to do X, you are forbidden to prevent me from doing X, and i am able to do X without discomfort/sacrifice (this can be broken into smaller parts too, but i think this is enough)
Freedom implies moral responsibility of your choices (this can be debated, but i think the modern debate lean to that conclusion): if you are enslaved and are not responsible, you have no freedom at all. So physical addictions remove your freedom. You can do thought experiments about which addictions remove your freedoms and which do not, but i recon most drugs won't really change your freedom.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
What sexism specifically?
Well this to start: “ A woman who sleeps around throughout her twenties and is left with nothing is not free.” There’s a lot of pretty messed up sexism packed in there.
That's not sexism. It's contrary to the modern feminist idea that woman can do that the same as men and it's perfectly healthy for them. That's just an idea, not a fact, and personally I've come to doubt that it's true for most women. Maybe not for most men either, tougher to say.
It's reflective of the authors values, not sexist. It's not discriminatory towards women.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well this to start: “ A woman who sleeps around throughout her twenties and is left with nothing is not free.” There’s a lot of pretty messed up sexism packed in there.
That's not sexism. It's contrary to the modern feminist idea that woman can do that the same as men and it's perfectly healthy for them. That's just an idea, not a fact, and personally I've come to doubt that it's true for most women. Maybe not for most men either, tougher to say. It's reflective of the authors values, not sexist. It's not discriminatory towards women.
> It's reflective of the authors values, not sexist.
It’s reflective of the author’s values, which are sexist.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not sexism. It's contrary to the modern feminist idea that woman can do that the same as men and it's perfectly healthy for them. That's just an idea, not a fact, and personally I've come to doubt that it's true for most women. Maybe not for most men either, tougher to say. It's reflective of the authors values, not sexist. It's not discriminatory towards women.
> It's reflective of the authors values, not sexist. It’s reflective of the author’s values, which are sexist .
Maybe, maybe not. You'll have to share with me proof if you want me to believe that.
I hope you're not just saying that on the basis of that one statement, that'd just be trying to pass ignorance off as knowledge.
Re: Modern “Freedom” Means Being a Slave to Impulses
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're referring to the Christian tradition that the author brings up - it's usually men that are admonished by that tradition explicitly, because men need to hear it. Generally, it's considered that women and mothers don't need as much instruction being a later (or more fulfilled) act of creation than men. It's also why the deceiver focused on Eve first - if she fell, Adam would surly follow.
And yet it's not only men who are admonished by the article. An example of a woman is given, too. That one example is of a woman who isn't monogamous and is "left with nothing". What is it that she has lost?
I think it's a shorthand for implying the application of her youthful beauty funneled into a deep romance to establish a lasting relationship. Some beauty can prolong into older ages, but some of us are just beautiful and highly desirable when we're young. I think it's sort of an interesting population level evolutionary trait, it makes sense that the desirable/attractiveness phase would overlap with the fertile phase, and would both decline together. Having the infertile mix with the fertile is not populationally optimal.