Tzeentch

Metaphysical rubbish, for which you have no proper answer? Man, at the very least initially, does not choose to exist. That much is a fact, and no amo...

Morally that is certainly not the case, assuming we can agree on such basic things as the right to bodily integrity. If such is the case in practice, ...

Yes, you would like to make the claim that individuals owe their existence to the societies they are born into, forgetting the fact that man doesn't c...

And you are just an internet philsopher. Your point?

None of which, at least initially, a result of his voluntary choice. Therefore I believe none of these to hold any moral claim to him.

If you don't see that man is in essence free, you must believe that his existence can belong to someone else. Who?

Oh, then by whom, by virtue of their existence, are they rightfully owned or to whom are they rightfully indebted?

One would assume that the denizens of this forum would be intelligent enough to understand that the phrase "Man is born free" does not imply that babi...

Sure, why not? If they are guided by reason and that is where it takes them. However, one would hope that since they had to undo the damage done to th...

I don't share that view of human nature, and frankly I think attempts at psychoanalyzing complete strangers sooner point towards projection.

What about all the other individuals who do not need constraints? Are they are just to be considered collateral damage?

I don't require constraints to live in peace with others.

From an early age individuals are taught what to believe. By their parents, by the educational system, politicians and so forth. This happens before t...

While individuals are inherently free, they must still actively accept that freedom, and few do. Most are enslaved in their formative years and never ...

Then shame on whoever did that claiming. I believe what I stated, and this is just an underhanded (and sleep-inducingly old) attempt at framing it as ...

Fixed.

Oh, sure. I just don't believe any of it to be legitimate. I don't think a state of nature implies freedom without constraint either. I'm having troub...

And this group of people can lay a claim to the individual's freedom or impose responsibilities, then? I don't think a state of nature implies an abse...

What is society, and how did it take man out of this "state of nature"?

Dependency does not detract from his essential freedom. Unless you wish to argue individuals may claim moral authority over others? I don't think that...

And yet he is free. In fact, children are more free than most adults.

I think any claims to another's essential freedom is to be looked down upon and dismissed. One of the few claims for which I think that to be the case...

Individualism is problematic especially to those who would like to lay claim to the individual and use him for their own purposes. Surely, the only re...

"Every individual needs revolution, inner division, overthrow of the existing order, and renewal, but not by forcing them upon his neighbours under th...

Evil, in my opinion, requires an intention to hurt. The degree to which one produces suffering unintentionally, I call that ignorance. I don't agree t...

I'd love to talk about Jung and his ideas. The link is not working for me however. Perhaps you could share a particular idea of Jung you'd like to dis...

Looney is the word I'd use for those who would seek to impose their moral views on others through state coercion. Trying to do good by doing evil is o...

What reason is there to want to prevent death, if not for a fear of it?

Transcending humanity through reverence of its basic drives: fear of death and desire for pleasure. This should be called hyperhumanism!

Most would probably be able to reach a surface level understanding of his theories. To reach the level of understanding of Einstein though, would like...

Can you explain that difference? At the surface there seems to be one, but on further inspection I'm not so sure. Weren't the bits of reality that Ein...

It seems to me that many intellectual fields require extensive study of the subject and/or a certain intellectual faculty that not everbody possesses ...

That is a rather key distinction for me.

Philosophy.

Agreed. As far as I am concerned, they are all misplaced opinions about how other individuals should live their lives. I do not support control of a s...

So the groups Marxism posits one belongs to are illusory as well?

The term "social identity" to me suggests an exterior source of self, which I think is contrary to what Buddhism teaches.

Is Buddhism about social identity?

I don't see how having strong opinions about how others should live their lives is in any way complementary to Buddhist ideas. I'd sooner consider it ...

Europe, sadly, deals with exactly the same issues.

Fundamental ignorance is the prime reason one should practice caution when forcing conditions on others. As far as I am concerned, that applies anywhe...

The choice to have a child is akin to choosing on behalf of that child that it must experience life. One might say that there is no child yet on whose...

I am arguing no such thing. I'm here to test my own ideas and there's no reason my comments should be seen as a personal attack on anyone's life choic...

Is what one deems to be good a justification for making major decisions on behalf of another? If so, why?

I think forcing both of those upon people is clearly wrong.

That will not do. If one can force negative conditions on others whenever they are of the opinion it does more good than harm, clearly the slippery sl...

I don't really worry about those things.

Or you could just lock your door. Why is violence the default mode of thinking?

I think it is what you are suggesting, but you seem aware that it is quite an untenable position to hold, thus the old semantic smokescreen is deploye...