|
|
| Author |
Message |
| McJamweasel |
This post is not being displayed .
|
McJamweasel
BCF Junkie
Joined: 22 Mar 2002
Karma :  
|
 Posted: 17:19 - 14 Dec 2009  Post subject: Is freedom a zero sum game? |
 |
|
Scott Adams thinks so:
| Scott Adams wrote: | Lately I've been wondering if freedom is a zero sum game. In other words, for one person to get more freedom, someone else has to lose the same amount, but usually in a different way.
I predict that you just reflexively rejected that concept, but your stubborness won't stop me from unfolding the idea a bit more. To that end, only examples can help.
Example one: In order for me to be free to walk down the sidewalk, other people must be prohibited from driving on them.
You could argue that I'm still free to take my chances and walk on the sidewalk. But that argument can be made for any restricted freedom. I'm also free to rob and kill as long as I accept the risks of doing so. But as a practical matter, my freedom to walk down the sidewalk depends heavily on restricting your freedom to use it in some other fashion.
Example two: Your freedom to marry the person of your choice depends on the person of your choice having only one option: you. That's the opposite of freedom. The two of you cancelled out, freedom-wise. On the other hand, if the two of you agree that the other is an ideal mate, that's an example of coincidence and not freedom. You just got lucky. Too bad the other people who wanted to mate with each of you are now restricted in their freedom to do so.
You can play this at home. Think of any freedom you enjoy, and consider how someone else's freedom had to be curtailed for you to have it.
The universe isn't making more freedom. If you want some, it comes at someone else's expense.
But that's okay because free will is an illusion anyway. I'll say it before you do. |
What do you think? My initial reaction was 'bollocks', but he does make a pretty good point.
Si...Hetzer, I'm sure you're input to this will be worth a read.
____________________
BCF: Be yourself, just don't be an arse. |
|
| Back to top |
   |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
| Kickstart |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Kickstart
The Oracle
Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma : 
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
| Posted: 17:29 - 14 Dec 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
Nope its too simplistic in that some freedoms hurt nobody, ie the freedom to make the world your toilet in Siberia and Mongolia, it affected nobody that I could see.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching. |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| oldpink |
This post is not being displayed .
|
oldpink
World Chat Champion
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Karma :  
|
|
| Back to top |
 |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
| Posted: 17:37 - 14 Dec 2009 Post subject: |
|
|
I think it would be safe to assume that he used the best examples of which he could think in order to support his claim. So wrecking those should decisively negate his claim.
His examples are beyond peurile. Drivers don't care about 'losing the freedom to drive on the sidewalks' as they have a far greater freedom as an alternative; driving on the road. Pedestrians don't care about having no freedom to walk along roads, they have pavements. Ergo, no qualitive or quantitive freedom has been lost whatsoever.
Freedom to marry etc. Peurile tosh. Either both people want it or an offence is being commited against one or both of them, and an offence falls outside the concept of freedom in the context in which he speaks of it.
Rational people are happy to forgo a freedom where they can see to exercise it would cause direct harm to another, so it becomes a non-issue (in the speaker's context). It therefore follows that his "zero-sum" label is a misnomer.
If he had aimed his claim at a govt, one for example that bans the possession of firearms, he would have a far more valid point. As he would with any act against mere possession of something because of what might be done with it. Ditto for any act that causes no direct harm against another.
Freedom is, therefore, a plus-sum game. Using firearms as an example again, millions would have the pleasure of ownership while only thousands would be harmed. That's a clear plus-calculation (more positives than negatives).
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!" |
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Itchy |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Itchy
Super Spammer
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| Hetzer |
This post is not being displayed .
|
Hetzer
Super Spammer
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| oldpink |
This post is not being displayed .
|
oldpink
World Chat Champion
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
|
| oldpink |
This post is not being displayed .
|
oldpink
World Chat Champion
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Karma :
|
|
| Back to top |
| |
You must be logged in to rate posts |
|
 |
Old Thread Alert!
The last post was made 15 years, 290 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful? |
 |
|
|
Help & FAQs
Search BCF
Members
Groups
Events Calendar
rating
rating