4 ms·

Freedom is not so simple: “This procedure thus implies a certain logic of exception: every ideological Universal–for example freedom, equality–is 'false’ in so

Freedom is not so simple: “This procedure thus implies a certain logic of exception: every ideological Universal–for example freedom, equality–is 'false’ in so far as it necessarily includes a specific case which breaks its unity, lays open its falsity. Freedom, for example: a universal notion comprising a number of species (freedom of speech and press, freedom of consciousness, freedom of commerce, political freedom, and so on) but also, by means of a structural necessity, a specific freedom (that of the worker to sell freely his own labour on the market) which subverts this universal notion. That is to say, this freedom is the very opposite of effective freedom: by selling his labour 'freely’, the worker loses his freedom–the real content of this free act of sale is the worker’s enslavement to capital. The crucial point is, of course, that it is precisely this paradoxical freedom, the form of its opposite, which closes the circle of 'bourgeois freedoms’. - Slavoj Zizek

stcredzero 10y ago
Just because your quasi-mathematical model breaks, that doesn't necessarily mean this has anything to do with reality. We have high confidence that mathematical models in physics and chemistry often do have consequences and say something about reality. Economics has an interesting track record here as well. In the realm of ethics, politics, and ideology? Ehhh...not so much.
- undershirt 10y ago
  It's interesting that contradiction, that is inconsistency, is a hint that a mathematical system does not model something in reality, because we don't want to believe such a thing can exist. But it is about as hard to work out the kinks of inconsistency from of a mathematical model as it is from ideology, law, ethics, and other such systems that we construct to guide our behavior. So I would say that METAmathematics has a lot to say about us and our ability to construct consistent systems-- it's really hard. Freedom is one such example since it cannot belong to everyone when competing interests are at play. That might be a strange way to slice it though, since the language we use to describe freedom is probably not as well defined as we think.
  - stcredzero 10y ago
    the language we use to describe freedom is probably not as well defined as we think Your basically saying the statement is bunk, and we shouldn't live our lives by it or treat it as on oracle. Basically, when power is more distributed, lives are better for more people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs Trying to come up with a philosophy of freedom with the integrity of set theory is probably just mental masturbation. I don't think you need mathematical precision with things like that, any more than you need mathematical precision in defining geological strata.
- JacksonGariety 10y ago
  Ideology has almost nothing at all to do with mathematics, you got that right.
sedachv 10y ago
Stallman recognized this from the start of GNU: "proprietary modifications will not be allowed" https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html

stcredzero 10y ago

Just because your quasi-mathematical model breaks, that doesn't necessarily mean this has anything to do with reality. We have high confidence that mathematical models in physics and chemistry often do have consequences and say something about reality. Economics has an interesting track record here as well. In the realm of ethics, politics, and ideology? Ehhh...not so much.

undershirt 10y ago
It's interesting that contradiction, that is inconsistency, is a hint that a mathematical system does not model something in reality, because we don't want to believe such a thing can exist. But it is about as hard to work out the kinks of inconsistency from of a mathematical model as it is from ideology, law, ethics, and other such systems that we construct to guide our behavior. So I would say that METAmathematics has a lot to say about us and our ability to construct consistent systems-- it's really hard. Freedom is one such example since it cannot belong to everyone when competing interests are at play. That might be a strange way to slice it though, since the language we use to describe freedom is probably not as well defined as we think.
- stcredzero 10y ago
  the language we use to describe freedom is probably not as well defined as we think Your basically saying the statement is bunk, and we shouldn't live our lives by it or treat it as on oracle. Basically, when power is more distributed, lives are better for more people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rStL7niR7gs Trying to come up with a philosophy of freedom with the integrity of set theory is probably just mental masturbation. I don't think you need mathematical precision with things like that, any more than you need mathematical precision in defining geological strata.
JacksonGariety 10y ago
Ideology has almost nothing at all to do with mathematics, you got that right.

sedachv 10y ago

Stallman recognized this from the start of GNU: "proprietary modifications will not be allowed" https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/manifesto.html