On Aug 28, 12:08 am, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote:
> Your argument has the obvious structure of the false dilemma either
> charities or government... ignoring the rather obvious possibility of
> charities and government.
I never said that nor implied it to my knowledge.
> The real question is how an unexamined life can lead to political
> conservatism and how,
I am examining everything and the label of "conservativism" does not
apply to everything I believe it or do not believe in.
> once that avoidance is established, can an
> interest be rekindled or the willfulness that is at the center of the
> will to power can be tempered by its own actual desires. The answer,
> of course, is art.
You know, I consider myself an artist. You may not, and that is OK.
But let me tell you, I am envious of the "art" that does not involve
words. They have it MADE. They get to express anything and
everything and nobody raises an objection.
>In government, properly structured as a democracy, a
> man has a single vote independent of his wealth.
In life, man has infinite votes with his words and actions, and that
is why it is so much better than any controlling government.
> If however, you are one of these hacks whose only purpose is to
> drive a wedge between people and their own political interests,
No, I assure you , I have no such desires. As if I could? From a
post on an internet group?
No, I am here to express what I think at this time, to explain why I
think it, to give the reasons why I think it, to listen to what
others think at this time, to argue the results, and if I can make a
difference either way, I consider that a positive outcome.
>Your idea that it is the single man against the government
No, it isn't. Why would you choose a word like "against"? I never
said that. I would really appreciate it if you used the words I write
rather than "what you think I wrote" Do you have motives I don't know
about?
No, it is about the individual being free to express himself "within"
a government , live the life he chooses, if he does no harm yet is a
responsible citizen (this is under debate), without being trampled,
crushed, or oppressed by those who have decided what is right for him
or have predecided what is the "good"
> It is the single man against any form of
> domination including the government. The false dilemma underneath your
> post has been successfully used to drive a wedge between people and
> their interests.
I never implied or said any false dillemma, unless you care to show
me. I could have I suppose. But , yes, your first sentence there is
what I meant.
> I look forward to the time when all basic
> needs are covered, no one is allowed to starve, everyone has a place
> to sleep and when they are sick they are cared for.
That is wonderful. Now please describe in excrutiating detail exactly
how that is to be done, and then we can discuss the moral and
philosophical implications.
>Then the artists
> can compete to keep us entertained.
They already do! They have never stopped, and never been hindered to
do so. Unless you feel that they should not have to work.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
