Quoting Ham Priday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Ron -- > > > I'd say you have me. We are bound to value, we are slaves > > to choice. Life demands it or moves on without you. > > Choosing no choice is a choice. We are only truly free of > > value when we pass from this existence (relatively speaking) > > this is an assumption of course but a reasonable one at that. > > I couldn't let your phrase "we are slaves to choice" pass without comment. > Isn't that a curious way to look at Freedom, Ron? I've always thought of > freedom as the capacity to choose; yet you see it as slavery! > > We are all born as creatures of nature, which (from a biological standpoint) > means we must struggle to survive. Struggle is a given in this world, for > the survival of a species or an individual. No animal has the freedom to > sprout wings and escape from the vicissitudes of nature. But do we say that > the need for a dog or a crab to struggle impairs its freedom? Or that the > need to make choices negates man's freedom? > > Freedom, like everything else in existence, is relative. We must aim for > it, work at it, and exercise it in order to preserve it. Jefferson said > "Eternal vigilance is the price of Liberty." In a free society we have the > power to choose our means of livelihood, our government representatives, our > recreational pursuits, our spouses, our spiritual beliefs. This is not true > of Islamic cultures, for example, where the rulers are patriarchal > successors, belief and behavior conform to Allah's law, and marriages are > arranged. If you've followed recent politics in Russia, you'll note that > they still follow the Soviet communist tradition: Premier Putin appoints his > successor, and public elections are little more than token endorsements. > Dictatorships restrict individual freedom, as do socialist states that tax > earnings at 60% or more. > > Americans are fortunate to live in freedom -- so long as they value it. > Sadly, the recent trend to "social equality" has made many forget the > individualism and self-reliance on which our freedom is based. Today's > liberals are not only willing, but eager, to trade individual freedom for a > welfare state that will provide cradle-to-grave care for all. (I sometimes > wonder if they've ever read 'Animal Farm', '1984', or 'Atlas Shrugged'.) > > I'm persuaded that the essence of man is value-sensibility. Since we cannot > choose our values if we're not free to do so, living simply to satisfy our > hunger or gratify our carnal appetites is a regression to animal behavior. > Human beings are uniquely endowed with the capacity to discriminate between > values and to act in accordance with their choices. As the "choicemakers of > the world" humans are a "more noble creature" worthy of higher aspirations. > Therefore, whether it's an "intellectual or social level" principle or not, > I agree with David Kelley that "no one can claim a right to make others > serve him involuntarily, even if his own life depends on it." Beautifully expressed, Ham. Many thanks.
Regards, Platt ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
