Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How far do you agree?

    I was just thinking, we always hear about the freedom but we enjoy and that has been protected against the Nazi's and Communists but surely they enticed their populations with the same promise of "freedom?". What makes our freedom any more enjoyable then theres.

    I understand, especially in Nazi Germany and alot of communist regimes that people were spyed on so it makes my point seem silly at first. But the again America also spies on its population, it just doesnt dispense of them in the way that other communist regimes have done of dissidents.

    But anyway, my understanding of freedom is this.

    There is no inbetween as the definition of freedom is complete freedom. You either are not free or you are.

    In this country, we are not free. If i wanted to run down my street naked shouting death to christians (by the way this is an example and not a manifestation of my beliefs), I would probably be reprimanded.

    In the same way capitalist countries, although we constantly hear about capitalism and democracy meaning freedom, restrict the freedom of the poor to such a severe degree. I understand that some poor people have managed to make it out and become wealthy but, on the whole surely the point of a capitalist country is that for someone to be at the wealthy side of the spectrum, there needs to be a fair few people on the poor side of it.

    Anyway, i was just wondering what are your opinions, Is freedom expirienced by us or is it just an illusion, peddled by government after government (whatever the political ideology they follow), to keep the population undeer control?

    DISCLAIMER: I was merely musing on this thought so before some cocky little muppet who ahs just learn the word communist in the negative connotations that it is seen today and is eager to berate someone and use it, please kindly **** off. This thread is designed to encourage debate and not an invitation for people to just let fly at other peoples thoughts.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    l
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    How far do you agree?

    I was just thinking, we always hear about the freedom but we enjoy and that has been protected against the Nazi's and Communists but surely they enticed their populations with the same promise of "freedom?". What makes our freedom any more enjoyable then theres.

    I understand, especially in Nazi Germany and alot of communist regimes that people were spyed on so it makes my point seem silly at first. But the again America also spies on its population, it just doesnt dispense of them in the way that other communist regimes have done of dissidents.

    But anyway, my understanding of freedom is this.

    There is no inbetween as the definition of freedom is complete freedom. You either are not free or you are.

    In this country, we are not free. If i wanted to run down my street naked shouting death to christians (by the way this is an example and not a manifestation of my beliefs), I would probably be reprimanded.

    In the same way capitalist countries, although we constantly hear about capitalism and democracy meaning freedom, restrict the freedom of the poor to such a severe degree. I understand that some poor people have managed to make it out and become wealthy but, on the whole surely the point of a capitalist country is that for someone to be at the wealthy side of the spectrum, there needs to be a fair few people on the poor side of it.

    Anyway, i was just wondering what are your opinions, Is freedom expirienced by us or is it just an illusion, peddled by government after government (whatever the political ideology they follow), to keep the population undeer control?

    DISCLAIMER: I was merely musing on this thought so before some cocky little muppet who ahs just learn the word communist in the negative connotations that it is seen today and is eager to berate someone and use it, please kindly **** off. This thread is designed to encourage debate and not an invitation for people to just let fly at other peoples thoughts.
    What...omfg.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SunOfABeach)
    What...omfg.
    .........?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Personally, I think we have freedom.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cpj1987)
    Personally, I think we have freedom.
    to what extent though?

    I personally think he is vile and poison but just for an example look at Anjem Choudrys group ISLAM4UK recently being banned? Thats not freedom surely?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I bought some freedom the other day.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think freedom is nothing but relative. People affected by the Nazi rule didn't have ideas of freedom similar to ours, up to the point when they did. In order to analyse this easily, give maximum freedom an arbitrary unit of 10, and subtract the freedom you have e.g. an 8, to get 2. Zero in this system means having as much freedom as you think you can possibly get. If people in Nazi Germany, for example, didn't have any image of ultimate freedom as we have nowadays thanks to the development of culture, or maybe stories about better places, then their result number would be a zero, simply because their idea of freedom was pretty limited.

    Conversely, we might judge that the UK has a freedom value of a mere 7, for example, even though those poor people under the Nazis would have given their freedom an 8. So the satisfaction with our level of freedom is solely dependent on the value 10 of maximum freedom, and what we understand by maximum freedom. Our sense of freedom is taken in the context of this ultimate freedom, making someone with relatively less freeom than us feel freer (depending on culture for example).

    Freedom is most definitely not an illusion, especially for those who have lost it, or lost it and regained it. Freedom is the extent to which you can do all that you want, but benefit from others' work at the same time; this is where the dillema occurs. No one wants to live in the woods, even if that means they can do all that they want; but no one wants to be completely controlled by society, even if that means they get all the support and benefits that come with it. In this context a common idea of freedom must exist, and that ranges from owning 20 guns to paying 40% tax. This is all down to the actual people, their culture and education.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    to what extent though?

    I personally think he is vile and poison but just for an example look at Anjem Choudrys group ISLAM4UK recently being banned? Thats not freedom surely?
    'We' as a collective are not free, but that's majorly only because 'we' is composed of people with opinions and thoughts like Islam4UK.

    Freedom for an entire society is not a good thing. If Islam4UK had freedom to do as they pleased, it would restrict the freedoms of almost everybody else in Britain. So yes, there has to be a compromise between who gets freedom and who doesn't, and the ultimate goal in making that decision is often to maximise the potential for society.

    The freedom to form irrational, religiously informed groups such as Islam4UK is removed in exchange for the freedom of the rational, scientifically informed groups to continue their progressive work - work that is good, rather than destructive, for society.

    People often speak of freedom as if its a universal right for all people. I disagree. There are certain people who are not worthy of freedom, or who are dangerous unless they are stripped of their freedoms.

    In my ideal society, any groups or individuals who spout irrational, religiously informed opinions should be stripped of the freedom to do so, but those groups or individuals who promote rational, non-religiously informed opinions or statements should be given freedom in its entirety.

    'We' are not free, but I certainly am.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Phugoid)
    'We' as a collective are not free, but that's majorly only because 'we' is composed of people with opinions and thoughts like Islam4UK.

    Freedom for an entire society is not a good thing. If Islam4UK had freedom to do as they pleased, it would restrict the freedoms of almost everybody else in Britain. So yes, there has to be a compromise between who gets freedom and who doesn't, and the ultimate goal in making that decision is often to maximise the potential for society.

    The freedom to form irrational, religiously informed groups such as Islam4UK is removed in exchange for the freedom of the rational, scientifically informed groups to continue their progressive work - work that is good, rather than destructive, for society.

    People often speak of freedom as if its a universal right for all people. I disagree. There are certain people who are not worthy of freedom, or who are dangerous unless they are stripped of their freedoms.

    In my ideal society, any groups or individuals who spout irrational, religiously informed opinions should be stripped of the freedom to do so, but those groups or individuals who promote rational, non-religiously informed opinions or statements should be given freedom in its entirety.

    'We' are not free, but I certainly am.
    haha, this is the kind of post i was wishing to receive.

    you have given another side to the topic inwhich i base my beliefs and shown another perspective. Your first paragraph was actually very true.

    one thing though, when you talk of irrational opinions, surely this is subjective as one persons irrational view is anothers rational view?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Flying Cookie)
    I think freedom is nothing but relative. People affected by the Nazi rule didn't have ideas of freedom similar to ours, up to the point when they did. In order to analyse this easily, give maximum freedom an arbitrary unit of 10, and subtract the freedom you have e.g. an 8, to get 2. Zero in this system means having as much freedom as you think you can possibly get. If people in Nazi Germany, for example, didn't have any image of ultimate freedom as we have nowadays thanks to the development of culture, or maybe stories about better places, then their result number would be a zero, simply because their idea of freedom was pretty limited.

    Conversely, we might judge that the UK has a freedom value of a mere 7, for example, even though those poor people under the Nazis would have given their freedom an 8. So the satisfaction with our level of freedom is solely dependent on the value 10 of maximum freedom, and what we understand by maximum freedom. Our sense of freedom is taken in the context of this ultimate freedom, making someone with relatively less freeom than us feel freer (depending on culture for example).

    Freedom is most definitely not an illusion, especially for those who have lost it, or lost it and regained it. Freedom is the extent to which you can do all that you want, but benefit from others' work at the same time; this is where the dillema occurs. No one wants to live in the woods, even if that means they can do all that they want; but no one wants to be completely controlled by society, even if that means they get all the support and benefits that come with it. In this context a common idea of freedom must exist, and that ranges from owning 20 guns to paying 40% tax. This is all down to the actual people, their culture and education.
    This. :yes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    How far do you agree?

    I was just thinking, we always hear about the freedom but we enjoy and that has been protected against the Nazi's and Communists but surely they enticed their populations with the same promise of "freedom?". What makes our freedom any more enjoyable then theres.

    I understand, especially in Nazi Germany and alot of communist regimes that people were spyed on so it makes my point seem silly at first. But the again America also spies on its population, it just doesnt dispense of them in the way that other communist regimes have done of dissidents.

    But anyway, my understanding of freedom is this.

    There is no inbetween as the definition of freedom is complete freedom. You either are not free or you are.

    In this country, we are not free. If i wanted to run down my street naked shouting death to christians (by the way this is an example and not a manifestation of my beliefs), I would probably be reprimanded.

    In the same way capitalist countries, although we constantly hear about capitalism and democracy meaning freedom, restrict the freedom of the poor to such a severe degree. I understand that some poor people have managed to make it out and become wealthy but, on the whole surely the point of a capitalist country is that for someone to be at the wealthy side of the spectrum, there needs to be a fair few people on the poor side of it.

    Anyway, i was just wondering what are your opinions, Is freedom expirienced by us or is it just an illusion, peddled by government after government (whatever the political ideology they follow), to keep the population undeer control?

    DISCLAIMER: I was merely musing on this thought so before some cocky little muppet who ahs just learn the word communist in the negative connotations that it is seen today and is eager to berate someone and use it, please kindly **** off. This thread is designed to encourage debate and not an invitation for people to just let fly at other peoples thoughts.
    Yeah. Governments and the elite of societies will shout on about freedom. It's a tool to preserve power by getting the masses behind you and not against you.

    Sure its an illusion. Governments do what governments want, not what people want. They have 4 years to do what they want, they can bomb 12 villages but at the end of the 4 years still get reelected as long as they have a good few weeks campaigning. If you do get sick of them you'll only ever bring in the other viable party and they're pretty much the same.

    What freedom, people are bound by thousands of laws, most taking advantage of them or being a pointless inconvenience.

    Freedom? You never have the means to be free. As soon as you get paid you have taxes, bills, mortgages. You get lured by advertisers. You never have enough money to get anywhere, back to work you go.

    Whatever money you do have you give up on alcohol, and have no doubt without alcohol there would be no control. Society presents you with the illusion that you are free to do what you like, that you have freedom, to people this refers to the consumption of alcohol, so it allows you to get drunk. You come back to work happy, not thinking about the situation you're in. After a while the constant pleasure seeking makes you useless. People who are useless, go to work, come home, get pleasured and keep going. By then they are tied to the system, they are making it go round, even if they don't want to.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I believe in determinism. Free will is just an illusion, there's no such thing. I had an argument with someone about this who kept saying...

    "If I wanted to walk out of this classroom, I could"
    "Go on then"

    She never left. There are external factors that will determine which choice we make. In the walking out the classroom, it's the fact that "the teacher's here" and she "abides by the rules." The 'choice' is therefore irrelevant because the outcome is determined = No such thing as freedom.

    edit: this is more theology/philosophy but the same thing applies I think
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inseriousity.)
    I believe in determinism. Free will is just an illusion, there's no such thing. I had an argument with someone about this who kept saying...

    "If I wanted to walk out of this classroom, I could"
    "Go on then"

    She never left. There are external factors that will determine which choice we make. In the walking out the classroom, it's the fact that "the teacher's here" and she "abides by the rules." The 'choice' is therefore irrelevant because the outcome is determined = No such thing as freedom.

    edit: this is more theology/philosophy but the same thing applies I think
    You're using your free will to deny that you have free will.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hy~)
    You're using your free will to deny that you have free will.
    No because it was determined by the external factors (studying sociology and seeing how external factors have an effect on us, watching this really convincing video etc) that I would believe in determinism. Free will does not come into it as it's an illusion/safety mechanism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    haha, this is the kind of post i was wishing to receive.

    you have given another side to the topic inwhich i base my beliefs and shown another perspective. Your first paragraph was actually very true.

    one thing though, when you talk of irrational opinions, surely this is subjective as one persons irrational view is anothers rational view?
    Rationality can be objectified by use of structures such as logic.

    If a person's opinions are logically deduced from sound, self-evident premises, then they are rational. If they are illogically deduced, or are logically deduced from ill-justified premises, then they are irrational.

    You may then, I suppose, ask the question of 'who decided what counts as self-evident premises, and what counts as ill-justified premises', but there is a scientific system for questioning the validity of premises which should be used.

    But I guess the point of my post, in general, was to say that freedom cannot exist for all men - freedom can only exist for some men at the expense of freedom for others. That is a fact of life, and the way we must deal with it is to make sure that we choose who gets freedom and who does not in a way that best maximises the potential of our society.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inseriousity.)
    No because it was determined by the external factors (studying sociology and seeing how external factors have an effect on us, watching this really convincing video etc) that I would believe in determinism. Free will does not come into it as it's an illusion/safety mechanism.
    You still have the choice to reject any outside influence you want, just as you are rejecting this, and just as your friend had a choice. Just because she didn't get up and leave, that doesn't mean she couldn't have. It just means she didn't. Free will stems from this choice.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    And surely if you haven't got a choice then me writing this is meaningless, I can't convince you that free will exists. So should I just stop?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Free will and freedom do exist. Just don't count on the fact that other people shall accept your determination to act freely all too readily. Freedom has obstacles, but they can all be dismantled - in theory. So, you're as free as your mind's limitations and the world's limitations.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inseriousity.)
    No because it was determined by the external factors (studying sociology and seeing how external factors have an effect on us, watching this really convincing video etc) that I would believe in determinism. Free will does not come into it as it's an illusion/safety mechanism.
    Although others such as phugoid who have made some good points despite being the opposite of my views, I have to say that you come closest to actually matching mine.

    I too would most likely be labeled a determinist. However, you cannot try and persuade people though to reach this level of thinking as for someone who has led their whole life to believe that they are free and have free will to do what they want, will find it hard to come round to the way of thinking immediatly. It will take a large "though journey" through abstract thinking to begin to understand our views.

    I think the biggest obstacle people have with determinism is that they see it as all their actions are pre-written or they are not in control in the conventional sense. After a while of really deep thinking on the matter, you come to a point where you realise, everything is as a result of something else. To elaborate:

    A teacher attempts to describe to his class the concept of determinism. He is met with protests on the contary. One girl stands up and says, "See if I hadn't freewill, then how come I am standing up now and saying this? No-one told me to, I am doing it out of free will"

    She has a point from one level of thinking as she could have just as easily stayed quiet and said nothing. However, The fact remained, had the teacher decided to introduce the concept of something different, say, Good and Bad, the student would not have stood up and said what she did say. Therefore her actions/choices were dictated as a result of events leading upto that point.

    "What about the freewill in making the choice to say something." one might say. However, many other external influences will have also led to the girl speaking out. She may have grown up a confident child due to acting classes or encouragement from those around her, she may have also encountered the concept of determinism before which set her in a tangent believing it was not true. this inturn could have led her to feel passionately to the point she was willing to stand up and say what she said.

    Therefore, I agree with this poster in so far as freedom in the context of personal choice doesn't exist as it is a result of preceeding events.

    I apologise for what may be a confusing post, but I am new to this abstract thinking and am unable to structure my thoughts at this time into a consice account.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.