|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 869
|
So I made this thread to provoke debate between the 2 founders of the concept of government. If you have no idea who they are of what this is here's a bit to talk about:
Thomas Hobbes was the first man to devise a process of governmental affairs. He belived that since man could not control his self-indulgence, he was likely to provoke 'war'. His perception of war could've been a simple argument between two people. This is why he thought that man needed a superior, whether it was one man, or an assembly of people, to judge and consider what would be best for the nation. A number of years later, a man named John Locke challenged this way of thinking. He belived that man's right extended as far as not violating any other man's. I am a Lockean, a supporter of Locke, but I would like to hear out what's your stand in this. Now everyone, whether apathetic or not, is either a Lockean (Locke supporter), or a Hobbesean (Hobbes supporter). Discuss.
__________________
vagina Last edited by boondocks77; 09-17-2007 at 06:44 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Let's begin by rewriting your post.
Quote:
That being said, I support the Lockean notion of human rights, and I support the intention of a constitution which is designed to enshrine these rights. With exceedingly rare exception, human beings are not violent towards one another as a default state of affairs. Generally social pressures act in synergy with an innate human aggressive drive to create violence. Aggression in this context is really just the human propensity to, explore, understand, dominate; human drive itself, in other words. It gets corrupted by social situations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 869
|
Let's not. I know what I said. By calling me false, you're stating an opinion not a fact. I stick by what I have said.
__________________
vagina |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
What? You made a number of claims which are verifiable. This means they are falsifiable. I called them false. To say that entails the conversation is in terms of opinion makes about as much sense as this:
"The sky is made of gold plated hamburgers" "No it isn't" "That's just your opinion" |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
FFR Player
|
arn't hobbes those little fat people
__________________
![]() ![]() wewt10k aim: IMB3AU![]() http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...&q=vertex+beta I play Vertex BETA :O |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
FFR Player
|
I hadn't read through the posts:
I have a belief that religion is the cause of many wars Yeah, Bush has a lot to do with the current war, but people from that side of this world would kill us just because we don't believe in what they believe in And replying to the first post, I think I am more on the side of Locke; He seems most logical to me
__________________
![]() ![]() wewt10k aim: IMB3AU![]() http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...&q=vertex+beta I play Vertex BETA :O |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | ||
|
is against custom titles
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://andy.mikee385.com |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
FFR Player
|
Listen to Kilroy, Boondocks.
He correctly re-wrote your post. Your post stated some wrong ideas that were shaped by your opinion. I'm not an anarachist, so I like government. I don't trust people enough to be able to live without a supreme ruling force. I obviously believe in some of Locke's ideas as well, as I obviously don't want my "Life, Liberty, and right to own land" trampled on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 869
|
Quote:
As for the rest of you, I was trying to get at asking who do you support and why?
__________________
vagina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
FFR Player
|
I'd have to say that I'm on the Lockean side of this debate. My government teacher explained that a person's right to voilate another's stops when they come in contact with the latter. We as people decide what our own limitations are, and therefore decide what is right and wrong in their own eyes.
In regards to Hobbes' thinking, although there may be an authority figure, there are going to be people who don't agree with that person's view, and might have their own definition of what's right and what's wrong. So how is an authority figure or a group of people going to be able to agree on certain laws that people live by if no one agrees with them? Anyways, that's what I think.
__________________
The Ultimate Reward Is Honor, Not Awards. Do you like...dragons? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2007
Age: 28
Posts: 869
|
Quote:
__________________
vagina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | ||||
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Just kidding or not, ad hominem attacks have no place in CT.
Quote:
Quote:
Further, depending on your perspective, Hitler's government was a stunning success compared to the ruinous state of the Weimar Republic before the Nazi rise to power. What he did with the power was horrible, but that doesn't necessarily mean that all the concepts are wrong. Even more further, Hobbes saying that society needs authority figures doesn't even mean dictatorial authority figures in all cases. You can have a Hobbesean central authority legislating the populous without requiring that they be despots. Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
FFR Player
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Little Chief Hare
|
Heh, I thought you were talking about concepts used to support Hitlers regime. Hobbes is wrong in fewer ways for fewer reasons than Hitler.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Very Grave Indeed
|
Well, I was saying to "Hitler = Bad, Hitler = Hobbes; Hobbes = Bad" that I had issues with all three of those equalities. Both that Hitler's regime was universally and in all ways bad and negative -and- that Hitler's regime was somehow textbook Hobbesean thought, and that therefore, saying that the latter was bad because of the former was not good logic.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|