Philosophy

» pink101 - Unfolding

.
Will you be drawing a line through the philosophers that, at least, highlights the unfolding that leads to the present state of affairs?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Nice

.
That is a nice intro Leslie Elliiott gives you in her comments.
.
Hopefully, with all the philosophy talent we have at this site, it's a wonder there isn't a constant stream of discussion.
.
Theosophy seems to have a heavy voice that scares people away from thinking about the human condition.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Nataraja - question

It seems that Hobbes thinks government is necessary to protect us from ourselves, whereas Locke seems to think that individuals and their innate rights need safe-guarding against the institution. Are these views not quite at odds with one another?

Would a rights-based political theory undermine the power of the state, and thereby (to Hobbes) threaten the security of the individual? I am curious about how Hobbes would define political rights.

-- posted by Nataraja

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» RLSharp - question

In response to question posted by Nataraja:

Wow! How did you post? I received a message saying we could not post anything until Sept 1st. Anyway, yes Locke and Hobbes disagreed about a great many things. However, Locke owes a great deal to Hobbes. Hobbes developed the idea that we have natural rights, which cannot be reasonably taken away by the state. We cannot, for example, be expected to surrender our lives just because the govt. wants us to do so. We have a right to self-preservation, a natural right. There were natural limits on the state. Of course, the state could still disregard them if it was as powerful as Hobbes proposed. I think that's why Locke wanted those rights to be spelled out better, to trump govt. power even.

Both felt the state was created to serve us, not the reverse. However, Locke viewed that relationship similarly to how we view it today, whereas Hobbes viewed it as a strong monarchy (similar to how people viewed it in his day, especially in France).

-- posted by RLSharp

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» RLSharp - Nice

In response to Nice posted by pink101:

Well put, but subtle. I'm betting most people don't know what your post means. There is an easy tendency to accept what we are told, whether by religion OR the state. But any time you don't critically examine what you are told, you put yourself at the other person's mercy.

-- posted by RLSharp

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - On The Subject

In response to Nice posted by RLSharp:
.
I'm reading a good book on the subject now.
.
Mediated; by Thomas De Zengotita.
.
Here's a like with a little information:

http://archive.salon.com/books/int/2005/...

.
He seems to like Ludwig Wittgenstein.
.
????

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» RLSharp - On The Subject

In response to On The Subject posted by pink101:

Looks like an interesting book. I won't get a chance to check it out for a while though because of classes.

As for Wittgenstein, he was a VERY influential philosopher in the 20th century. He began as a positivist, but later became a proponent of language games, an idea that suggested that a lot of our identity and though comes from the language that we use. This especially applied to subsets of language, like scientific jargon, etc.

-- posted by RLSharp

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - On The Subject

In response to On The Subject posted by RLSharp:
.
"[Wittgenstein] began as a positivist, but later became a proponent of language games, an idea that suggested that a lot of our identity and though comes from the language that we use."
.
Ahah! That accounts for De Zengotita's hypothecations in his book.
.
It IS an interesting book in which the author tells us a lot about ourselves.
.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson actually borrowed from George Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights when he penned the stirring opening lines of the Declaration of Independence.

The VA Declaration of Rights opens with the following: "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."

Of course, Mason (and later Jefferson) were certainly incorporating Lockean principles. But the expansion of "property" to "pursuit of happiness" is a logical extension.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds