Munter's Philosophy Corner.

[katterz]

i did'nt put non non and slutty in the same senctence did i ?

[Munter]

Non, I'll make clear here also that I'm not expressing my own view when I say your parents make you more free, however it is an argument used by oppressors.

Now let's see, do I think your mum is restraining your freedoms by making you wear dresses, and threatening you with violence should you dissent? Quite possibly, maybe it's more of a psychological curtailment than a physical curtailment of freedom. Since there are no physical barriers preventing you from getting changed and stuff.

Now, if we then accept that, in these cases, you are having liberty taken away from you, we then need to ask ourselves if your parents should be doing this.
One argument would be that since you are not (legally) an adult, you are still under the jurisdiction of your parents and should do what they command, within reason.

So, maybe your freedom being restricted is permissible due to your age?

This will require more thought for me...

Here's a related question for you guys in the mean time:

Can threats restrict freedom?

Say you are in the house and a man with a loaded gun walks up to the door and says, 'you better not step out this house, cause if you do I'm going to shoot you in the head'.
He then sits in a chair across the road, the front door is unlocked.
Are you free to step out the door (assuming you don't want shot in the head)? If you wanted to step out the house, you could just as easily as before the gunman threatened you, surely.


What do you troopers think?

Has your freedom to step outside the house been diminished?

[rocbuilder]

threats can restrict freedom, like, when i stare at some one, he might come over and say, stare what stare, and probably beat me to a pulp XD
or you cannot say bad things about your country cause when i say something bad about the country and other ppl hear it and start spreading, i will cause those ppl to go to jail and me myself will go to jail. my country is a democratic country... there are ppl in my country that are like the police and catch ppl who say bad things or maybe let out secrets about the country. those 'police' have enough power to send me straight to prison without having a chance to say anything.
i have heard that in my country, there's a 'freedom of speech corner' and there are always an audience there to hear what u say...

[Munter]

Good contribution, guys!

I would argue that threats cannot constrict liberty.
People have committed terrible crimes and claimed they were not free to not commit the crimes, because the regime they were under threatened to kill them and their family, or both. Or threatened with torture, exile, and other things.
But even if someone threatens to do all these things to you, unless they physically constrict you, you are still free to carry out any action they threaten with punishment.

If a man says to me, "if you step outside this door I'm going to kill you", and he doesn't lock the door, or attempt to physically prevent me from stepping outside the door, then surely I am still free to do it? Even if as a consequence I'll be killed.

A man named John Rawls used examples like this to say that although we are free, in circumstances such as these, the value of the freedom becomes far less when we are threatened.

So maybe threats don't make you any less free, but make you feel less free.

Thoughts?

Next topic soon! something to do with moral philosophy I think...

Glad to see the interest in the topic so far!

Keep thinkin' guys!

[Wow_Give_Up_On_Life]

Well I disagree to a few things you have pointed out Munter so I will try to rebute your statements.

I would argue that threats cannot constrict liberty.

I would like to point to the evidence of what has changed in our daily lives. There is definatly more security around now in modern day society, this is because of the fact that people are afraid of threats. Some are afraid of terrorist threats. This has made asking for changes in law unacheivable.

I think if you do alittle reading into the darkness that has happened at Rwanda you would agree with my opinion.

But even if someone threatens to do all these things to you, unless they physically constrict you, you are still free to carry out any action they threaten with punishment.

Think of fear on the principle of a weapon, if trained on using the weapon it will be more effective. It is more effective in certain situations. What I think is that personally if your fear can outweigh your own actions, or atleast affect them to enough of a extent to terminate liberty.

[Munter]

Good reply!

However, I would like to clarify that I did try to distinguish the different Ideas of freedom here. And it seem that over the millennia millions upon millions have been seemingly enslaved by powers on the basis of fear, but the infringement they feel on their liberty is a different

I do not wish to undermine the seriousness of the situations that are found in events like the troubles in Rwanda, the worst of Stalin's Russia, or any horrific event such as these.

What I'm saying is that even fear cannot restrict a certain type of freedom, maybe it can't restrict freedom at all. But threats and fear diminishes the value of freedom.

To use my example, if a man stands outside my bedroom door right now with a loaded gun and says, "you step outside this door, you die" It still remains that I can walk out that door, even if it does mean I am killed as a result. I am still free to do what he forbade.
The value of this freedom may be diminished greatly though, as I am not willing to sacrifice my life for the freedom. And that may be where people feel forced to commit heinous crimes on the orders and threats of powerful regimes. If torture and death of yourself and possibly loved ones is the price your going to have to pay for exacting your freedom, then you would rather not exact it, the value of that freedom is diminished.

However, very often in such circumstances as these liberty is infringed, people are imprisoned etc in regimes such as these. But I think it may still stand that threats do not constrict your liberty, they take away the value from it.

Does this make sense?

[rocbuilder]

it makes sense, u changed the way i look at freedom, but still, i rather keep my head then feel free. so rules, laws and threats just make u feel less free when the freedom is always there... u could do everything u want just that... u will get into trouble

[Hitokiri]

yes munter it absolutely does.
But then laws are of no importance to your freedom as well.
Neither is group or parental control.
As most of those are repressive after an act you have done in all freedom.

The only thing then restricting your own freedom is your own set of morals and your conscience.
Which is why everyone has a different idea of freedom.
As you might think it's bad to do kick in a sandcastle, but I might not...

And I'm more inclined to agree with roc.
The perceived feeling of freedom is what really is induvidual freedom.
And that differs from person to person as all perceive freedom in a different way.

[katterz]

hang on hang on you have lost me along these lines ........

[purpledeer]

hmm i did not understand any of this i am canadian all we like to do is drink beer and PLAY HOCKEY