tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post3563161174285218026..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Book Introduction: The Myth of American ExceptionalismBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger184125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-51783883388442754102010-04-24T20:00:55.922-06:002010-04-24T20:00:55.922-06:00.
Self Government!
.
Imagine that in the late eigh....<br /><b>Self Government!</b><br />.<br />Imagine that in the late eighteenth century!!<br />.<br />.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-10550155971485250962010-04-24T19:55:49.111-06:002010-04-24T19:55:49.111-06:00.
For what it's worth on Timothy Ferris' b....<br />For what it's worth on Timothy Ferris' book:<br />.<br />I've been reading the book for over a month. I read books that promise to give me some insight this way. Carefully and slowly, often reading and rereading some sections over and over several times. This book is one like that.<br /><br />So, what am I getting out of it?<br />.<br />It looks to me that Ferris has gone back far enough in history to trace a particular line regarding the development of the ideas that led Western Civilization to think about self government. He starts talking about the Italian peninsula being a focus of expanding worldly influence as a result of its access to the sea and trade with so many ports. He dips back far deeper into history; but, his real focus begins with the Italian experience.<br />.<br />He moves on to ideas that developed in the minds of people as a consequentiality of free speech as well as how ideas have been squelched.<br /><br />He touches on the lives of many historical celebrities and he shows how that line (I mentioned above) developed to feed the minds of America's Founding Fathers. And, he brings in actions that unfolded in other parts of Western Civilization around the time of the American Revolution and Founding.<br />.<br />He is building a fairly strong case about how free speech fueled ideas that led to the major changes in world politics during the late eighteenth century. And, he talks about what took place in France around those same few decades. He gives some thumbnails on Rousseau and Robespierre that are quite different than what I had learned before.<br />.<br />So far, that is as far as I've read in the book. I like to reflect on what I read when it is so interesting.<br />.<br />The reader has to keep in his or her mind that Ferris is a science writer. He has done a great deal of study regarding the history of science.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-57944394363120111832010-04-21T16:09:05.733-06:002010-04-21T16:09:05.733-06:00.
Hey, R.H.I.P..
..<br />Hey, R.H.I.P..<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-45547258182956489512010-04-21T07:08:06.583-06:002010-04-21T07:08:06.583-06:00JRB. I explicitly said I didn't say he was wro...<i>JRB. I explicitly said I didn't say he was wrong. </i><br /><br />Quite right. So I've issued a correction.<br /><br />I'd recommend that Tom read the book so that Ferris himself can present the case, but he's rejected that idea since he holds the superior thesis and has already proven Ferris, the science writer hack, <i>banal</i>. There's really not much more to say.jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-85004944511717325212010-04-20T06:41:05.485-06:002010-04-20T06:41:05.485-06:00.
In response to the opening comment for this thre....<br />In response to the opening comment for this thread (made by Angie), I responded with,<br /><i>The myth of American exceptionalism has allowed people in positions of power to lead us about by our baser emotional noses.<br />.<br />On the other hand, Timothy Ferris, builds a great case for the idea that America was Founded on the model that comes out of science.<br />.<br />My recommendation is that as many as can, get a copy of his, The Science of Liberty, Democracy, Reason, and The Laws of Nature, which might blow away some of the more literal findings that are published here.</i><br />.<br />It appears as though there was a distinct backlash to the idea that Ferris <i>might blow away some of the more literal findings that are published here</i>.<br />.<br />It also suspiciously appears that there might be a distinct desire to keep the subject involved in Ferris' work off limits. And, so, the suspicion gives umph to our curiosity to learn more of what Ferris has to say.<br />.<br />So, methinks, Tom, thou doest protest too much.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-34504692648605795972010-04-20T05:41:34.339-06:002010-04-20T05:41:34.339-06:00.
So, are the readers to take it that your answer ....<br />So, are the readers to take it that your answer to the question, "Was America founded with the thinking that it was to be a grand and noble experiment in self government?", is "No" or "yes"?<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-55761628463246187912010-04-19T21:05:48.275-06:002010-04-19T21:05:48.275-06:00You do not use "experiment" in the scien...You do not use "experiment" in the scientific sense. You speak nonsense. Every new undertaking is an "experiment" of sorts. Even answering your continuing personal attacks and refusal to say anything of substance with sincere replies is an experiment of sorts.<br /><br />But not in science. Philosophy.<br /><br /> <br />And yes, Jefferson's interest in science isn't any more probative than his interest in religion, which he probably spent more time on. Of course, although he was a dilettante at both and his thoughts on religion are sophomoric, he does seem to have conceived of some sort of macaroni machine.<br /><br />I let the charge pass that there's some difference between science and technology that I ignored, since there were so many much more idiotic charges to answer. However, it appears Jefferson was far more interested in technology than pure science. You could look it up for yourself.<br /><br />What this "experiment" has proved is some folks would rather attack [me] than defend [Ferris]. This is pretty much the politics of our day, as well. But attacks bring us no closer to truth. At some point, one must defend their thesis, and I'm quite satisfied with my thesis on Aristotle since it also accounts for Islam's Golden Age, and medieval "Christian" science as well. [Note I really didn't credit Christianity for medieval science except for the belief that God is rational and created a rationally ordered universe. The credit goes to Aristotle.]<br /><br />I wouldn't have gone on this long [170+ comments now, perhaps an AC record---you got your "dedicated" thread, Phil] just to fight with you. This has been an area of interest to me, and this has been a productive discussion at least for me, making me hit the books more deeply on the subject. The history of "Jewish science" and the Nazis in particular was fascinating.<br /><br />And further, this: Einstein, in fighting against quantum theory, itself a product of "Jewish science" via Heisenberg [the "Uncertainty Principle" guy] and Niels Bohr, is famous for saying, "God doesn't play dice with the universe."<br /><br />Bohr supposedly replied, "Einstein, don't tell God what to do!"<br /><br />As we know from our studies of American mythology, that exchange probably never took place, certainly not in those words, and I certainly can't confirm it anywhere from any credible internet source.<br /><br />But I like the story. A lot. The full tale with Bohr's response included is more informative about both religion AND science.<br /><br />My "experiment" here was to try out my own ideas on science and mankind's history, to see if anyone could seriously challenge my take, especially in front of people who so desperately want to prove me wrong. The personal attacks were proof that they couldn't.<br /><br />Thx to everybody for your time, passion, and hostility. The "experiment" so far is a success.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-16870922924291744972010-04-19T20:06:09.118-06:002010-04-19T20:06:09.118-06:00.
Please answer this simple question for the reade....<br />Please answer this simple question for the readers, Tom.<br />.<br />Was America founded with the thinking that it was to be a grand and noble experiment in self government?<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-86561582580344021082010-04-19T17:17:06.760-06:002010-04-19T17:17:06.760-06:00JRB. I explicitly said I didn't say he was wr...JRB. I <i>explicitly</i> said I didn't say he was wrong. Why should I spend time and money on his book to discuss it with people who won't even read what I say?<br /><br />What I said was that his thesis "seems" to be banal, and not one of you has quoted a passage or idea that indicates otherwise.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-29794652035014242382010-04-18T09:49:32.264-06:002010-04-18T09:49:32.264-06:00.
Well, we could talk about the claim that Tom mak....<br />Well, we could talk about the claim that Tom makes saying he is anti-authoritarian when, in fact, he claims to be the authority, who cannot be refuted.<br />.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-86331683607202260722010-04-18T08:46:53.226-06:002010-04-18T08:46:53.226-06:00Modern science is possible without liberal democra...<i>Modern science is possible without liberal democracy---as I proved--</i><br /><br />You've proved adept at building and knocking down strawmen. As Ferris states, his thesis is that there is a symbiotic relationship between science and liberty and that they mutual flourish. As I said above, Ferris does not present a thesis that science has never been done or never will be done outside of a liberal democracy since that would be absurd. <br /><br />However, given the political systems arising in the west from Medieval time, the trend toward liberal democracies has been most conducive to the rise of modern science. <br /><br />I'd recommend that Tom read the book so that Ferris himself can present the case, but he's rejected that idea since he holds the superior thesis and has already proven Ferris, the science writer hack, wrong. There's really not much more to say.jimmiraybobnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-25635393718079146662010-04-18T08:15:36.222-06:002010-04-18T08:15:36.222-06:00.
Tom Van Dyke writes:
You did put your Ferrisism ....<br />Tom Van Dyke writes:<br /><i>You did put your Ferrisism out there, and I gave you a fuller thesis, and didn't charge you $25 either. You're a fucking ingrate.</i><br />.<br />It's good to blow off steam, Tom.<br />.<br />But, a "<i>fucking ingrate</i>" I am not.<br />.<br />The reason I would not discuss Ferris is plain to see and I explained it. I wasn't interested in getting set up by you just to get knocked down by you. I'm not going to be your strawman.<br />.<br />I asked several times for a thread on Ferris' book. But, couldn't get it. I suppose there are other places on the 'Net where some free and open discussions are being held. I can look for them if it's a big enough deal for me. Otherwise, I'll just ponder the ideas on my own.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-50643331177493529992010-04-17T21:43:28.142-06:002010-04-17T21:43:28.142-06:00Which brings us to my brother, Phil.
Love is supp...Which brings us to my brother, Phil.<br /><br /><b>Love is supportive of the other person's efforts at self discovery and as such, is at the root of liberty.</b><br /><br />Oh, there's nothing in the Declaration or the Constitution or the Bible or Roman Law to support anyone's foolishness.<br /><br />That's "positive" liberty, mate. <br /><br />Allow it, sure. But if you actually read this blog, Phil, don't I protest when anyone does a "commercial" for their faith? Why would I be any different toward your secular if not anti-theistic foolishness?<br /><br />Believe whatever you want, but if you want to pump Mormonism or Unitarian Universalism or Roman Catholicism or scientism or Ferrisism, be prepared to defend your ground.<br /><br />You did put your Ferrisism out there, and I gave you a fuller thesis, and didn't charge you $25 either. You're a fucking ingrate.<br /><br />;-)<br /><br />Have I ever offered Thomas Aquinas' views on the Trinity? Heh, hell, no. You do not throw what is sacred to the dogs. Neither do our Mormons on this blog offer their beliefs to scorn.<br /><br />But you put your and Ferris' beliefs out there and now you say that we're---I'm---supposed to have "love" for you, that<br /><br /><br /><b>Love is supportive of the other person's efforts at self discovery and as such, is at the root of liberty.</b><br /><br />It's not love to let you drown in your own bile. That would be downright unChristian, Phil.<br /><br />And I'm a really shitty Christian, OK, Phil? No Christian is any better than any other, and no better than any man. That's a fundamental truth of Jesus' message. <br /><br />And I'm trying to take to heart what you're saying, that I'm an arrogant prick who takes too much delight in his cleverness and God-given gifts. You're entirely right about that.<br /><br />But I really try to play it straight on this blog---that there is a truth to be found, or at least sought after, and that's what it's all about. What I write here on this blog is my best attempt to be true, and apply all my God-given gifts, and not stilt anyone's search for truth one way or the other. <br /><br />To fool anyone into "the truth" means nothing. Every time it looks like I'm "winning" an argument, I back off and introduce complications that trouble me. Read what I write sometimes with love instead of hostility. Each person must seek the truth for themselves. We teach each other, that's how God planned it. Of that one thing, I'm sure.<br /><br />So thanks for alerting me that I'm an arrogant prick. On the other hand, I gave you a better thesis than Ferris did, and didn't charge you 25 bucks. And put up with you calling me an arrogant prick, plus I wrote back to thank you for calling me an arrogant prick. What else do you want from me, Phil, and what more could I possibly give back to you? You got a good deal here.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-21796060251104273702010-04-17T21:43:03.356-06:002010-04-17T21:43:03.356-06:00Of course I was having some fun, Ben. But Phil do...Of course I was having some fun, Ben. But Phil does persecute me, and finds that more worthy of his time even after he's hijacked the thread and has the floor. He's barely written anything about Ferris' book, except revealing its agenda from the preface.<br /><br />Ferris is a smart guy, but he starts too late in human history. Modern science is possible without liberal democracy---as I proved---but it's fairly impossible without Western Civilization and specifically Aristotle.<br /><br />Ferris is a science writer, so when all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Science. Liberty.<br /><br />Balderdash. Liberty was in the works well before modern science. It's a correlation, not a cause. Aristotle is a <i>cause</i>.<br /><br />And I write this to you Ben, as a manifestly sensible and unangry man. The rest of this is giving unpaid therapy.<br /><br />______________<br /><br /><br /><br />Angie, I know you got issues. I didn't grow up under these Calvinist-authoritarian lunkheads who thought they had to scare me into some love of God to save my soul. Well, actually, I did, growing up in 1960s Catholic grammar schools taught by nuns, but actually, they weren't as crazy as the stories make them out to be. As time went on, looking back, I came to see each one of them as human beings, too.<br /><br />Even Gronk, Sister Miriam Paul, who had a face like the Wicked Witch of the West that could scare the bejesus out of any babe-in-arms just by smiling at them.<br /><br />Y'know, Gronk was OK. In fact, she was damn nice. We got her in 8th grade, probably because she was the smartest one of any of 'em.<br /><br />But, as you know, I'm still learning about this Protestant thing. As much as the Roman Church has disgraced itself [and God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit, if any of 'em exist] with this molestation scandal, our local church [St. Mike's] was never under the dictatorial control of any one priest. What sermon you heard depended on whether you went to the 6:30, 8'o'clock, 10, 11, or 12:30 mass, because it all rotated.<br /><br />Plus the sermon was only 5-10 minutes anyway. It was about the mass, not the sermon. <br /><br />Every once in awhile, one of these dudes would say something wack. You'd kind of shake your head---Did he just say what I think he said?---but soon the sermon was over, and you'd forget it.<br /><br />From what I read from you and Phil---and even from the Founding era---the Protestant churches tended to get personality-based. Not only did many Congregationalist congregations go unitarian, but there was one who followed the preacher into Episcopalianism.<br /><br />That could never happen in Catholicism [although it's happened a few times in South America, where there was only one priest.]<br /><br />[Oh, yeah, recently in Florida.]<br /><br />But on the whole, not. No one preacher could tyrannize or seduce his congregation into his own wackness.<br /><br />So I understand your anger, if I've read you right. Even if God exists, even if Christianity is true, there are human egos and narcissisms that are more interested in themselves than that truth.<br /><br />That's human nature, and God gives full rein to human nature---free will, all that.<br /><br />And that you rejected these wackos, well, that's part of your path as a living, breathing, thinking human being endowed by God with a brain and free will. If you didn't reject them, you'd be denying your very own God-given humanity. So you're doing just fine. Just don't substitute "humanism" or Ayn Rand for what you just turned your back on.<br /><br />That would be making the same mistake twice, and worse, Angie, because now you know better.<br /><br />______________Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-81988824004145645752010-04-16T07:06:00.195-06:002010-04-16T07:06:00.195-06:00.
By the way, human love is not such a simple thin....<br />By the way, human love is not such a simple thing as can be had by saying it is so.<br />.<br /><b>Love is supportive of the other person's efforts at self discovery and as such, is at the root of liberty</b>.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-27357488878595520112010-04-16T06:25:22.882-06:002010-04-16T06:25:22.882-06:00.
Ya think the guy's got a messianic complex?
....<br />Ya think the guy's got a messianic complex?<br />.<br />But, I'm sorry that what he has to say isn't as interesting to me as it is to him. Like I say, I have a pretty full plate.<br />.<br />I would like to discuss the book; but, would want to do that according to the book as I'm reading it rather than according to some person's attacks about helter skelter subjects--ones that haven't come up yet in my reading even though I know they get covered. This isn't a community college 101 course is it?<br />.<br />With due respect to Thomas, he doesn't have a very good handle on Ferris from what I've read so far.<br />.<br />Hey, Angie, have your read those pages I referred to about Jefferson yet?<br />.<br />Could you comment on that. I'm sure sorry JRB has left the building. He seemed to have a good grasp on the book.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-3466234863466570902010-04-16T06:08:37.594-06:002010-04-16T06:08:37.594-06:00Re: "Pinky, Pinky, why do you persecute me? [...Re: "<i>Pinky, Pinky, why do you persecute me? [Oh, we both know why...]</i>"<br /><br />Seriously?<br /><br />Can't be. There must be rich sarcasm intended in that ;-)bpabbotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17047791198702983998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-18320870875676236662010-04-16T05:04:52.576-06:002010-04-16T05:04:52.576-06:00Tom AND Pinky,
I am "double minded"...th...Tom AND Pinky,<br />I am "double minded"...that means, I wanted to delete the last several of my entries and found I cannot! <br /><br />You are right, Tom. I can't hear when I have not cleared my mind of past indoctrinations/experiences/etc. But, the process of getting rid of the old and transforming into the new is a process of reflection and study.<br /><br />I appreciate of you guys and your input here on this blog.<br /><br />Education, which liberal democracy demands, is the only way to remain free. And as I said before, the "ideals" of life liberty and pursuit of happiness are the ideals that must be defined by the individual person. No one should be defining those ideals for another. This is what negative liberty affirms, isn't it?<br /><br />Our country's educational system is where positive liberty also is affirmed. And without understanding our liberties, Americans do disservice to furture liberty.<br /><br />I am continuing in the book and appreciate the comments. Progress has been made by scientific discovery. Understanding history helps one to appreciate that.<br /><br />Philosophy helps one to form that frame so that progress can be seen. But, at the same time, ethics demands a constancy with what traditional values of behavior. Otherwise, science becomes the usurper of the "human and their rights" to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.<br /><br />The culture wars seem to be over tradition's role, while the scientific realm is continuing its debate about where to draw its lines in maintaining civil society.Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-91395718573775215382010-04-15T20:40:00.112-06:002010-04-15T20:40:00.112-06:00Here he goes again. He's not listening to you...Here he goes again. He's not listening to you either, Angie. It's just a pretense at discussion, not a real one. he doesn't hear a word you say.<br /><br />Pinky, why your anger against me is more important to you than explaining Ferris' thesis or actually reading mine, that's for a professional to answer. I've never shown you anything but friendship, behind the scenes. <br /><br />Pinky, Pinky, why do you persecute me? [Oh, we both know why...]<br /><br />I don't have to read Ferris' thesis in toto because his original premise is flawed: he starts only at the Renaissance.<br /><br />Too late to understand science and the West.<br /><br />My thesis, which leaves you speechless, starts at the proper place---the <i>whole</i> of Western Civilization.<br /><br /><i><br />What I said was that Ferris thesis isn't necessarily wrong, but it seems banal. Aristotelianism is a cause of Western civilization, liberal democracy a correlation and a product of it.</i><br /><br />Angry people can't hear logic, and so you have made yourself deaf. A commenter on a philosophy blog I participate on sent me a citation from the Roman Lucius today, and all I could do was think of you, Phil. Wise up, old man, before it's too late. Don't die angry. You don't even know who your friends are. I'm the only one around here who gives you the time of day. Because I love you man, despite your hate toward me. You don't have to love me back, but know who's who and what's what.<br /><br /><i>"And it's exactly the same with you people; you grant the premises of any<br />given doctrine and accept what follows from them, assuming that the consistency<br />of the argument proves its truth, when in fact it is a false consistency. And<br />some of you die in hope, before you see the light and condemn your deceivers;<br />some do realize that they've been duped, but too late--they're old men by that<br />time, and can't face recanting. They're ashamed to have to admit at their age<br />that they've merely been playing childish games and didn't realize it; so they<br />cling to their ways for very shame, vociferously accept their situation, and<br />proselytize busily, so as not to be the only ones deceived, but to have the<br />comfort of seeing many another in like case with themselves. They see too that<br />if they let the truth be known they will forfeit the respect and eminence and<br />honor they now enjoy. So they say nothing, if they can avoid it; they know how<br />far they have to fall to the level of everyone else. You won't come across very<br />many with the courage to face up to it, say that they've been deceived, and try<br />to turn away others who are on the same path. But if you do come upon such a<br />man, call him an honest man, a good and righteous man--a philosopher, if you<br />like, for he is the only man to whom I do not begrudge the name. The rest,<br />though, either have no knowledge of truth, though they think they have, or do<br />know the truth but conceal it in their cowardice and shame, in their desire for<br />men's good opinions."</i><br /><br />I don't care what you think of my thesis. It is what it is, and you haven't said a damn word about it. I didn't even write it for you, because I knew you'd be deaf to it. And don't try to turn Lucius around against me either, Phil. I don't give a shit about your or anybody else's "good opinions" of me. Which I prove with every comment and post, eh, Ben?<br /><br />You and Angie can have the rest of this thread, talking past each other, each for your own purposes, pretending to be having a discussion with each other.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-12035021951120328022010-04-15T19:27:44.127-06:002010-04-15T19:27:44.127-06:00.
I dont' know, Angie; but, it sure seems like....<br />I dont' know, Angie; but, it sure seems like there must something about Ferris and his book for it to have set off so much resistance.<br />.<br />I have a lot on my plate and like to stick to one thing at a time here.<br />.<br />You've got to hand it to TVD though. He certainly is good at discombobulating what he doesn't like.<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-53598656909335243962010-04-15T16:16:28.162-06:002010-04-15T16:16:28.162-06:00And peace was bought by those who did not adhere t...And peace was bought by those who did not adhere to Rome's power and authority...the Ceasar's were considered the "gods' and this is when Christians were viewed as atheists, because they would NOT worship Ceasar!Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-30822952439128265822010-04-15T16:14:48.828-06:002010-04-15T16:14:48.828-06:00correction, I meant to say, negative liberty..
Is...correction, I meant to say, negative liberty..<br /><br />Is the point being that those that adhere to the animal nature of men think that men have to be trained to act alturistic, or benevolant...while they hold to such thinking "above the frey of the common man"?<br /><br />Such thinking is what the Roman Empire did to Christian communities. But, it is not what our Founders did to Christian communities. Our Founders wanted liberty, and protected liberty through our rights, while Rome wanted peace at all costs...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-31737466556871260142010-04-15T16:09:37.140-06:002010-04-15T16:09:37.140-06:00Pinky,
You are onto something...
Here is the diff...Pinky,<br />You are onto something...<br /><br />Here is the difference between negative and positive liberty:<br />The concept of negative liberty refers to freedom from interference by other people. According to Thomas Hobbes, "a free man is he that in those things which by his strength and wit he is able to do is not hindered to do what he hath the will to do." (Leviathan, Ch. XXI, [2])<br /><br />The distinction between negative and positive liberty was drawn by Isaiah Berlin in his lecture "Two Concepts of Liberty." According to Berlin, the distinction is deeply embedded in the political tradition. The notion of negative liberty is associated with British philosophers such as Locke, Hobbes, and Adam Smith, and positive liberty with continental thinkers, such as Hegel, Rousseau, Herder, and Marx.<br /><br />The distinction between positive and negative liberty is considered specious by socialist and Marxist political philosophers, who argue that positive and negative liberty are indistinguishable in practice, or that one cannot exist without the other.[<br /><br />NOTICE THAT MARX DOES NOT THING THAT THERE IS A DISTINCTION BETWEEN POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE LIBERTY!!! WHAT, THEN, IS THE "CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED"? iS THE "CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED" THOSE THAT ARE MANIPULATED OR CONTROLLED BY THE INFORMATION, OR THE LACK OF INFORMATION GIVE TO THEM? THIS IS ALSO IN OPPOSITIION TO OUR 1ST AMENDMENT RIGHTS. <br /><br />Therefore, I think that co-ercive education in a certain direction is abuse of power...the Magna Carta, the Summa Theologica, Two Treaties of Govenment, the Declaration of Independence, and our Constitution ALL represent liberty in the face of tyranny, which "positive liberty" is....according to Wiki's definition!!! Brain-washing or indoctrination is NOT what I call a liberal democracy...Angie Van De Merwehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12617299120618867829noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-9488422161882075392010-04-15T15:25:28.772-06:002010-04-15T15:25:28.772-06:00.
Here is the comment you made, Tom. If we break y....<br />Here is the comment you made, Tom. If we break your statement down, it is obvious you are claiming you know Ferris' thesis exactly. How could you possibly claim to put yours up against his if you didn't know his exactly?<br /><br /><i><b>Because I don't care if Ferris is a Pulitzer winner: we're strictly "anti-authoritarian" around here, eh? I'll put my thesis up against his anytime. And just did.</b></i><br />.<br />You can get off the hook easily by just discontinuing your attacks and entering into a reasonable discussion with respect to those who are reading the book instead of forcing irrelevant rabbit runs.<br />.<br />I'm concerned you have discouraged worthwhile insight into Ferris' book and his additional work. <br />.<br />Does his work fly in the face of positive liberty? Is that the problem?<br />.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06756814849309388483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-16253869844383468752010-04-15T13:15:20.556-06:002010-04-15T13:15:20.556-06:00For example, the claim by TVD that he knows the ex...<i>For example, the claim by TVD that he knows the exactamento of Ferris' thesis.</i><br /><br />I never claimed that, Pinky. You're really grabbing at straws now.<br /><br /><br />What I said was that Ferris thesis isn't necessarily wrong, but it seems banal. Aristotelianism is a <i>cause</i> of Western civilization, liberal democracy a correlation and a product of it.<br /><br />Ben, it's I who am arguing <i>against</i> a reductio ad Hitlerum, since the Nazis still managed to do some damn good science.<br /><br />As for the Nazi rejection of the "Jewish science," physics, it appears that didn't last very long, much like Lysenkoism.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik<br /><br />But such facts and arguments have no place in this "discussion," and I'm attacked for posting them. I'm not the Lysenkoist here.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com