surely it is true that man evolved as a social creature before he developed a genuine sense of self? — Pantagruel
The existence of the state is owed to the mistrust we have of each other — TheMadFool
Isn’t it an irony that in a place of business or corporation the individual, with their skills, submits to the greater good of the company for its success. — Brett
You pose one of those eternal questions about individuals and their relationship to the powers that governs them (the state). — Neuron420
Because we are all individuals and have different viewpoints of where the line lays between individuals and the state. — Neuron420
Is that really the case? It seems to me that the state and the individual are an organic growth of necessity and co-existence — Brett
I have no thesis. I’ve asked a question that I have no answer to so I hoped to explore it with others here.
However, in answer to your question regarding “necessity and co-existence”, it’s relevant because they need each other, that they are not really separate entities. It’s necessary that they co-exist for the survival of both. — Brett
That’s true about personal needs, but are personal needs important enough for the general health of the community and future wellbeing?
The state as you define it might belong in the background creating and enforcing laws but that idea of the state is a political tool, or mechanism, for the managing of the real state, which is the population at large.
The Australian Aboriginal culture is regarded as the oldest culture in the world and yet I don’t imagine they survived all that time through the concept of individuality. But it serves our modern culture to believe in the idea of individuality, it drives the economy.
My question is still, if we can, which should we choose?
You're saying the "real" state is the population? — BitconnectCarlos
So these are not transhistorical terms, and it is very much an anachronism to ask which came first. Someone posing a similar question in feudal society might have asked: who came first? Priests, farmers, or soldiers? — StreetlightX
Being able to differentiate ourselves in a landscape (physical/social/mental) defines what an ‘individual’ is. — I like sushi
What is ‘best’ is a pointless question. — I like sushi
Another point worthy of consideration is the psychological role of the nation compared to that of religion. This is something that has been of significance for some time. What are your thoughts on those in line with the human ‘individual’? — I like sushi
What is ‘best’ is a pointless question. The question is more about ‘what are we?’ And the answer to that is a continual process by which we engage in life (actively or passively until death). — I like sushi
Once it made sense to submit to God. The reward was eternal life in the presence of God. There was little or no reward in the present. Everything was defined by that idea. Of course it was riddled with injustice. But the state as a psychological creature, as opposed to a religious creature, does not seem to be an improvement, and it’s the psychological state that has placed the emphasis on the individual, because that’s where the disease or problem rested, down deeper than the state as it appeared. A happy person was bound to be more of a benefit than the weight of despair. So the emphasis on the individual. The healthy individual was bound to be a benefit but somehow that mutated into the idea that the individual was more important than the state. — Brett
There was more to it than the bold part ...
What is ‘best’ is a pointless question. The question is more about ‘what are we?’ And the answer to that is a continual process by which we engage in life (actively or passively until death).
— I like sushi — I like sushi
Yes there was more, but I don’t regard my question as about “what we are”. — Brett
Instead of; how can I contribute in a way that creates the most wellbeing for the most people? — Brett
My question now is, I suppose, in what way are we contributing with our sense of individuality. What do you have to contribute that would create the most good for the most? — Brett
‘What we are’ is the bedrock your question lies on though. To explain further, I meant that ‘what is best’ can only be addressed with a fuller understanding of ‘what we are’ - be this as an individual or otherwise. What is more the ‘best’ knowledge we have of the situation of ‘others’ is through ourselves (quite obviously: the ‘obvious,’ ironically, being something easily overlooked!) — I like sushi
What is more the ‘best’ knowledge we have of the situation of ‘others’ is through ourselves — I like sushi
Why would anyone in their right mind presume they know what is better for others? — I like sushi
rather than what I arrive at as good through my necessarily painful and hard journey of coming to understand ‘what I am’ — I like sushi
I’m against the idea, at its core, of a ‘nation of people’ or a ‘state of people’ above the individual human spirit. — I like sushi
This is the crux of the question I suppose. There is a state, it exists. As Pantagruel suggested; the community came before the individual. So what is the best way to live in it? — Brett
State does not equate to community — I like sushi
State does not equate to community. I was quite clear, as others have been, about the difference between a community of humans and a state/nation. The interests are completely different beasts as the latter are VERY recent occurrences - in terms of human existence. — I like sushi
I view more extreme altruistic views with as much concern as I do nihilistic views — I like sushi
don’t see any difference except in size. And size may very well be the problem. But it’s a fact that can’t be ignored. I think states do — Brett
I think there is a significant difference between an organic community (family/clan/tribe) and one that is institutionalized (polity) — Pantagruel
Why do you think? Take a stab at it as a given and maybe you’ll find something. — I like sushi
If what I’m talking about is not the state then I’m happy to consider another term for what I’m talking about. Because I don’t see the individual as being up against governance only, as if everything the individual comes into conflict with springs from authority — Brett
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.