Lets talk something about "philosophy"
Sort:
May 9, 2022
0
#2
If they have to be mutually exclusive, how unfree is safety? Does it mean you’ll be locked in a cage forever?
I prefer an ice cool lager 🍺 ✌️😎
May 9, 2022
0
#8
You want to live and live in a safe zone, but do you feel free when you are there?
You want to be free but you want to be free in the safe zone, is that free?
Ah, philosophy! The most important component of Artificial intelligence. 
safety brings me to think of proudhon on the social contract , ie we give up freedoms to be protected from danger , for example we allow police to break into our homes to stop a crime , we allow govts to enact laws that adversley affect our freedoms so we feel safe , (look at the "patriot act " for the powers we give the state because of the threat of terrorists
ive always wondered though why cannot opt out of society and its social contract , and keep your personnal freedom , but then i realise if too many of us did that the status quo and the establishment it supports would be gone like the dodo , not that i would mind but our rulers would never vouchsafe that and often pass laws prohibiting free individuals
May 10, 2022
0
#13
Freedom is not a preference. It is something that we already have. Something we are born with.
of corse I like to be safe, I prefer it.
Freedom and responsibility.
Freedom + safety = absolute happiness
May 10, 2022
0
#16
Yurinclez2 wrote:
Freedom + safety = absolute happiness
wrong
Freedom + safety + God = absolute happiness
Freedom + safety + God = A Miracle ! 🙀
There's and interesting story by Jorge Luis Gorges "The Lottery in Babylon" in which, society is governed by a lottery established by "The Company," a hidden corporation that randomly reassigns the destiny of every individual with rewards/punishments being equal based on the outcome of chance. Borges emphasizes the distinction between the desires, needs, values, etc. and the further-out gambles they are all willing to submit to in order to protect everyone's involvement in creating the prizes/punishments involved in playing, which seems to imply that we are willing to accept our fate, however good or bad, as long as we all decide the rules, and it isn't determined by laws instilled by authoritative power. Essentially, the idea that we can accept whatever outcome as long as we all can feel that the outcomes were arrived at fairly, like gambling; you couldn't feel cheated in anyway by the guy who won when you lost, because you both accepted the same rules. I think there is definitely merit in the idea that valuing safety vs. freedom is doomed to fail, in that the governing of human beings by other human beings will inevitably become tainted by those who desire power over others. Safety and self-preservation go against the values expressed in nature, whereas freedom is the fundamental nature of existence.
May 30, 2022
0
#20
UItron wrote:
Which do you prefer?
Freedom or safety?
why?
It depends on a lot of factors. I'll list a few;
- If I left safety to be free what would the danger be?
- what kind of safety and or freedom (physical, spiritual, mental etc.)
- what would God want me to do?
- If I knew that freedom was wrong in a specific situation, yet I was tempted, part of me would want to be free and another part of me would know it would be wrong (or vice versa). Too parts of my soul would have different agendas therefore I could not prefer one as a whole.
Which do you prefer?
Freedom or safety?
why?