Yes, that’s exactly what I’m asking. Apply your own mind to the the situation or are you going along with Rousseau who thought people did not know their own will, or Proudhon who believed in a social contract that did not involve an individual surrendering sovereignty to others, or Pettit who thought that instead of arguing for explicit consent, which can always be manufactured he argues that the absence of an effective rebellion against it is a contract's only legitimacy.Are you seriously asking me how the ‘social contract theory’ is relevant to this topic? — I like sushi
one of the books I'm reading right now seems to go to the heart of this topic. It's called "Mind, Self, and Society" and it is quickly becoming one of my favourites. — Pantagruel
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m asking. Apply your own mind to the the situation or are you going along with Rousseau who thought people did not know their own will, or Proudhon who believed in a social contract that did not involve an individual surrendering sovereignty to others, or Pettit who thought that instead of arguing for explicit consent, which can always be manufactured he argues that the absence of an effective rebellion against it is a contract's only legitimacy. — Brett
So you were just playing dumb. — I like sushi
Individualism, of the individual, is like the idea that all men are equal. Nature says differently, but we chose to try and live by the idea. But it constantly need picking up as it stumbles.
If the idea and value of individuality is so important and valuable then why does it threaten the state? And why is it a threat and is that a good or bad thing
the state ultimately wants to maintain a monopoly on force and it's concerned with power. Note that I'm considering "the state" here as kind of its own entity apart from the individuals composing it. — BitconnectCarlos
By state do you mean the machinations of the state; the unelected members, the permanent established bureaucrats, or the elected government?
None of those. — BitconnectCarlos
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.