Post ASkaBi8U69twPssrVQ by noself@writing.exchange
(DIR) More posts by noself@writing.exchange
(DIR) Post #ASkaBgw2YwLwh03PTE by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T12:13:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
#freewill #freedom #nature #evolution @philosophy for an event to be free takes a lot of philosophical examination. Even abstraction can be accused of cause if manifested by a causal (evolved) being. We are soft determinists (a little pregnant). Freedom is a matter of degrees and at present, it is hard conceptualize absolute freedom in will, thought, and action. This is more grist for the mill inre the evopsych of hope and fiction. #evolutionarypsychology
(DIR) Post #ASkaBhddwpEOsESEQy by rmkelly@zirk.us
2023-02-16T13:41:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@noself @philosophy It sounds like you're saying that we're "a little pregnant" due to our ability to conceptualize. True?
(DIR) Post #ASkaBi8U69twPssrVQ by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T14:01:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@rmkelly @philosophy Our thoughts on freedom were most influenced by Daniel Dennett. "Freedom Evolves"
(DIR) Post #ASkaBidKFUZTxXJUZs by rmkelly@zirk.us
2023-02-16T15:16:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@noself @philosophy New to me. I will consult Dennett. Thx for reference.
(DIR) Post #ASkaBjCm7gvZjTtnpg by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T15:21:39Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@rmkelly @philosophy a large part of where Dennett goes is in regards to moral culpability. We diverger there. Interestings discussions going down that road though. We'd be interested in your thoughts once you read Dennett.
(DIR) Post #ASkaBjj2BkjRLWzZ7A by Dianora@octodon.social
2023-02-16T15:24:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@noself @rmkelly @philosophy You agree more with Caruso then?
(DIR) Post #ASkaBkS3UMkDbA3WHw by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T15:53:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Dianora @rmkelly @philosophy OK yes I agree "more" with Caruso. Where I differ from both Caruso and Dennett is that I am morally an anti-realist. I do not believe in rational violence or crime; Such actions are irrational mental disorders.The need for justice is primal and instinctual. They feel vital and powerful. Without the traits of exacting revenge, we might have not survived the evolutionary battle. In the bush the traits were vital, but they are no longer
(DIR) Post #ASkaBku3oF97019swK by Dianora@octodon.social
2023-02-16T15:58:36Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@noself @rmkelly @philosophy Physics with the ER = EPR conjecture does give more credence to the "Spooky action at a distance" that disturbed Einstein. Hence realism. Nevertheless I also believe violence or crime are irrational mental disorders.As I noted on #Philosophy earlier even crows take revenge and it seems to me we should be beyond that now. Even Schadenfreude is distasteful to me. Dangerous people should be kept away from others for our good not to satisfy a blood thirsty primitive revenge.
(DIR) Post #ASkaBlLMAkyqMfvgUC by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T16:19:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Dianora @rmkelly @philosophy We are anarchists. Freedom is huge. Our particular brand of nrkism is only possible for what you and I would consider rational beings. But in such a society, it would be necessary, as you say, to separate those who are dangerous. In our imagined utopian society there would be ways to care for such individuals and help them to realize the rational precept, "for anything to be free, all things must be free." Harming others imprisons us.
(DIR) Post #ASkaBm2bZxZiWoADtg by kentpitman@climatejustice.social
2023-02-16T16:51:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@noself @Dianora @rmkelly @philosophy My position is that even anarchy must be orderly. The rights of someone to do what they want must follow some variant of the Golden Rule (or one of its variants, usually also named by precious metals). It's one of those paradoxes like the idea that a tolerant society must not imply tolerance of intolerance.Often, of late, you hear "conservatives" talking about freedom when what they mean is the freedom to abuse others with impunity. That's really the opposite of freedom.One way I like to think of it is that the term "freedom" is dangerous to use as an unqualified term because we are conditioned to think all freedoms are good. But person A's freedom to beat up person B infringes a great number of freedoms of person B to do things that hurt no one. Those two freedoms cannot be peers of one another in any meaningful way.I usually sum it up this way: "Where there are no rules, bullies rule." If all anarchy aspires to is the creation of (for what of a better word) bullydoms, that's not exactly a shining achievement. Even Libertarianism often just degenerates into bullying because it rarely wants to admit new concepts, needs, or members. It is not a recipe for a full society and almost by definition rejects any metrics which would assess its goodness. I'm all for avoiding excess in government, but sometimes the minimal workable set of rules is nontrivially big. Minimal is not equivalent to minimum.#Freedom #Society #Anarchy #Paradox #Rules #Bullying #Politics #Government #Justice
(DIR) Post #ASkaBmetHcCSRY4nZY by hayley@social.applied-langua.ge
2023-02-16T22:03:41.648111Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@kentpitman @noself @Dianora @rmkelly @philosophy How do bullies rule? How do they acquire power i.e. how do they convince others to do as they say?One should work against said bullies as they would any other oppressors, too, it's a continuous process.
(DIR) Post #ASkaBnDHDlhoACAGAa by noself@writing.exchange
2023-02-16T18:12:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Dianora @rmkelly @philosophy Popper and Dewey have been on my radar for years.Yes, the hope is that we can evolve beyond our natures. My position is the only path is through mindfulness, being aware that evolution has ignorantly shaped us to survive and reproduce and all our behaviors are to maximize that. Once we decide that we want more than just surviving and reproducing, then we can, with mindful practice, gain some measure of freedom from evolution.