4 ms·

> You have to make an argument that freedom is inherently good, which is not obvious to me Your next sentence holds that assumption as obvious: > I think it's

> You have to make an argument that freedom is inherently good, which is not obvious to me Your next sentence holds that assumption as obvious: > I think it's good to force people to do things in many situations Why do you think you should have freedom to even think, let alone decide, what is good for other people?

bowsamic 3y ago
> Why do you think you should have freedom to even think, let alone decide, what is good for other people? It's not necessarily good for each person, but good for society. Also I don't even know if I should have that freedom, that would be something we would have to philosophically investigate.
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  You seem to be using the word "good" as if it's universally understood and agreed upon, but that's not the case. Why do you even think you should have the freedom to decide what's "good" in the first place?
Jenk 3y ago
"You're not allowed to rape" is a pretty strong example.
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  "You're not allowed" implies that someone else has the freedom to decide what is and is not allowed. All roads lead to freedom. There can be no tyranny without freedom to tyrannize - there's just no way around it.
  - Jenk 3y ago
    It's not implying anything. It's explicitly telling "We as a society have decided for you" This is literally what law is. A social construct to codify (and enable the enforcement of) what is deemed moral vs amoral.
    - bheadmaster 3y ago
      > We as a society have decided for you Which implies that someone else had the freedom to decide what's good for you. Society is just a bunch of other people.
      - Jenk 3y ago
        Ya, the majority of society (or not in many cases of authoritarian states across the globe, but I digress). You appear to be trying to paint some kind on complex philosophical picture where it just simply doesn't exist. Law is the codification, and ratification, of what society deems ethical/moral behaviour. Unless you are about to start declaring some magic creates law, no shit it comes from people.

bowsamic 3y ago

> Why do you think you should have freedom to even think, let alone decide, what is good for other people? It's not necessarily good for each person, but good for society. Also I don't even know if I should have that freedom, that would be something we would have to philosophically investigate.

bheadmaster 3y ago
You seem to be using the word "good" as if it's universally understood and agreed upon, but that's not the case. Why do you even think you should have the freedom to decide what's "good" in the first place?

Jenk 3y ago

"You're not allowed to rape" is a pretty strong example.

bheadmaster 3y ago
"You're not allowed" implies that someone else has the freedom to decide what is and is not allowed. All roads lead to freedom. There can be no tyranny without freedom to tyrannize - there's just no way around it.
- Jenk 3y ago
  It's not implying anything. It's explicitly telling "We as a society have decided for you" This is literally what law is. A social construct to codify (and enable the enforcement of) what is deemed moral vs amoral.
  - bheadmaster 3y ago
    > We as a society have decided for you Which implies that someone else had the freedom to decide what's good for you. Society is just a bunch of other people.
    - Jenk 3y ago
      Ya, the majority of society (or not in many cases of authoritarian states across the globe, but I digress). You appear to be trying to paint some kind on complex philosophical picture where it just simply doesn't exist. Law is the codification, and ratification, of what society deems ethical/moral behaviour. Unless you are about to start declaring some magic creates law, no shit it comes from people.