07 Dec 2010, 10:18 pm
07 Dec 2010, 10:28 pm
07 Dec 2010, 11:26 pm
ruveyn wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
[
Yes leftists can be extremely illogical.
.
Yes leftists can be extremely illogical.
.
And some lefties can be very logical. For example, Albert Einstein who inclined leftward politically.
ruveyn
@ Bethie: Did you just seriously say individual and collectivism aren't opposites? Yeah I guess black and white are the same colours
.
@ ruveyn: Yes things are black and white if you think extremely reductive. Pixels mean nothing on their own, it's the pattern of the pixels that give meaning to the picture. So it's much more realistic to think in shades of gray.
@ phil777: Yeah it is good to be open minded, but there are certain things you consider good and bad so don't be naive. If you have a sense of purpose, you have a sense of what's good and bad. I know that sounds contradictory to what I said about thinking in shades of gray, but the fact is that standing for something also means standing against something else.
Last edited by AceOfSpades on 08 Dec 2010, 12:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
08 Dec 2010, 12:19 am
auntblabby
Veteran
Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 114,548
Location: the island of defective toy santas
08 Dec 2010, 4:44 am
Bethie
Veteran
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster
08 Dec 2010, 12:22 pm
AceOfSpades wrote:
@ Bethie: Did you just seriously say individual and collectivism aren't opposites? Yeah I guess black and white are the same colours .
. They're not, unless you're uneducated in their definitions and prefer to strawman schools of ethical and political thought as opposed to learning about them.
auntblabby wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
People on the left can be equated with Communism, in fact a lot of the Democrats in Congress have socialist/communist ties.
i would bet good money, that in a previous lifetime you were a certain senator from wisconsin.
I lol'ed at this.
Inuyasha wrote:
@ Bethie
Considering I have over 1,000 books (not exagerating) at home including 3 abridged dictionaries and 1 unabridged dictionary, a complete set of encyclopedias, as well as a Klingon Dictionary (though I don't speak Klingon I have it just for kicks). I don't think I need to go to that web page.
Also, I actually do read a lot, in fact that is how I get most of my news.
Considering I have over 1,000 books (not exagerating) at home including 3 abridged dictionaries and 1 unabridged dictionary, a complete set of encyclopedias, as well as a Klingon Dictionary (though I don't speak Klingon I have it just for kicks). I don't think I need to go to that web page.
Also, I actually do read a lot, in fact that is how I get most of my news.
And yet you make assertions that most high-school graduates would laugh at.
08 Dec 2010, 1:01 pm
08 Dec 2010, 1:24 pm
Bethie wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
@ Bethie: Did you just seriously say individual and collectivism aren't opposites? Yeah I guess black and white are the same colours .
. They're not, unless you're uneducated in their definitions and prefer to strawman schools of ethical and political thought as opposed to learning about them.
Collectivism = The whole
Individualism = The sum of society's parts
How are they not mutually exclusive? I'm surprised you would call it a straw man argument as if I'm trying to attack you. Or do you mean individualism and collectivism exist on a continuum, or maybe that you can be individualist on one issue and collectivist on another?
08 Dec 2010, 11:43 pm
09 Dec 2010, 1:12 am
09 Dec 2010, 4:15 am
09 Dec 2010, 9:36 am
09 Dec 2010, 11:51 am
number5 wrote:
Kon wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Or do you mean individualism and collectivism exist on a continuum, or maybe that you can be individualist on one issue and collectivist on another?
I think it's hard to argue against individualism if one means personel liberty but the more interesting questions for me, anyway, are the following:
1. Is unbridled free-market capitalism really compatible with personel liberty (or individualism)?
2. Is state communism/socialism really compatible with personel liberty (or individualism)?
If in the "real" world (not the Randian or Marxist fantasy land), the answer is no in both cases, are there any other alternatives?
It is "no" to both, which is why a balance is needed. People who believe 1. is a yes are under the illusion that they are somehow able to vote with their dollar, that the consumer has measurable power and say. This power only exists on a small scale, not on the grand scale. The power the giant corporations is so great that they alone are able to decide which candidates the people can vote for so their best interest remains paramount, thus tipping the scale in their favor at the detriment to the people. Walmart and Exxon really do rule the land.
Actually capitalism does work with individuality, because the purchasing power of the dollar does add up. If you get enough people annoyed with Walmart and choose not to buy things from Walmart, it will start to hurt them financially. Many corporations realize if they receive a complaint from one individual there may be others that are also annoyed and just haven't bothered to put a complaint in the complaint box.
Communism/Socialism is where everything is controlled by Government that really couldn't care less what people think and will throw people in jail if they raise too much of a stink about it. Canada actually doesn't have free speech protection despite what your "rights" are.
09 Dec 2010, 4:01 pm
09 Dec 2010, 4:03 pm
09 Dec 2010, 4:18 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| New Insights Into Left-Handedness & Cognition |
15 Nov 2024, 2:11 pm |
| Stupid Question: Why Are Urinals Left Out of some Cartoons? |
30 Sep 2024, 11:13 pm |
