Do you believe this statement?
It’s wrong to force a person to do anything that person does not want to do.
The explanations will be much longer.
Comments?
Feel free to jump to the end and put your two cents in, I know this is getting too long to read, but I’d like to see how long it can go.
I agree with you, but we must udnerstand that the persons living together must share common goals, and must be able to accomplish what they have to do without entering the category of people that “doesn’t want to.”
Simply put, accepting that someone remains in his bed, is fed and entertained during all day is not a good thing, even if that eprson doesn, want to do anything else. That very person must learn, in order to achieve world peace, to like to help his peers and be a proactive memeber of society.
a few examples.
A child is a person right? Well a child doesn’t want to go to school.
or
Your best friend is smoking crack and stealing to support this habit. They don’t want to stop.
Yes, Smooth, it is wrong to force a child to go to school, but it’s wrong for a child to expect to eat on your dime without following whatever rules you attach, but were this to be the rule, the child would have to be free to seek a better deal elsewhere.
Anyone who steals is forcing the victim to be victimized, how the victim wants to deal with that would be up to the victim.
Am I wrong?
Yes Myranthor, people in a household will have to be in congress with each other, or conflict would result.
I doubt, however, that any but the very wealthiest could afford to lay about for long.
And if he can, good for him.
I tried to come up with a counter-example on that children example. But couldn’t. Good job.
Thank you, I’ve thought long and hard about this.
Thank you, I’ve thought long and hard about this.
Any more?
My goals in life are to disrupt world peace. It is then wrong to force me to not do this?
Stay off of my property! (…or i’ll shoot)
For that matter, don’t shoot me.
Do i see a universal here?
The way I see it. Successful western countries today are helping to bring education to our children, but at the same time teaching them to try and gain all the riches they can in life.
To me it is better that we recieve the education, but to gain greed in the process only hurts us almost as just as much as education helps us to advance.
If you notice, in less modernized countries, you get the people who are not well educated, but are very humble and are happy living with the bare essentials.
I think we just need to find a way to teach both education and humbleness to every human being if we are ever to come near world peace. An impossible task.
If no one ever exerted any social force or pressure upon another the apocolypse would come in less than three months.
You could say such things as you don’t have to force people to do such things, but you could withold food (was the example) until they change. Well I hate to tell you this, but although slightly more cunning this is not morally different than holding a gun to a mans head. Before civilisation came around one could eat whatever they wanted, straight off the vine. To claim to own land is an absolute absurdity. So in short all civilisation is based on coersion. If you could turn it off 95% of mankind would die, and then maybe we would have world peace. But we would be running from the lions again.
Simple choice- get mugged for pieces of paper, or get bitten in half for the sweet tast of your abdomen. A truly peacefull and placid existance is going to take at least a five paragraph essay- 
.
Frighter, disrupting world peace would necessarily be not peaceful, if you involve others in your disruption they will be free to respond as they see fit. If you are an ass, expect folks to be rude, but if you want to get along things should be as peaceful as can be expected. Complete harmony would be boring. As long as your disruptive nature didn’t interfere with me or mine, and you left when I asked, I would not call for the posse to lynch you.
MRN, I think you miss the point, if I"m not free to be my own master of my own space what kind of tyrany is that? Even worse, it’s of my own making. If I can’t exclude undesirables from my personal space where does one go to find solitude? One would, of course, use the least amount of force possible to resolve the dispute in an effort to cause the least amount of evil to come into existence, but once manners don’t suffice, what do you do?
UnFaith, world peace depends less on environment and more on whether or not you intend to force compliance with your ideals. If those humble creatures were threatened with losing their life/freedom they would not humbly submit until the powers that be demonstrated the willingness to use overwhelming force, and then the best would die fighting to regain their freedom, leaving only the sheep. Look at Ameriika’s post civil war history. It has been a constant militarizing of the police to herd the sheep more efficiently.
LostGuy, socialization will mold the child into respecting the right of existence for everyone. Once respect for the life and property of others is intact, it will be rare that other social force is required beyond rewarding good behavior. You see how well punishing bad behavior is working.
You do not have to go along with the plan as long as somebody is willing to carry you, and you don’t disrupt others.
In a free world muggers would be executed on the spot because they cause a disruption to the peace and are detrimental to the tranquility.
For your five page essay look on the FAQ here:http://www.freedomnowok.org. Your apocolypse is addressed under ‘Why God hasn’t returned to earth.’
In a truly good world being bad is not gonna be nice.
Karma will be instantaneous.
If anybody has any better suggestions on world peace, I’m interested as your feedback improves my delivery.
Thank you all for your time.
Ok, I see. Yeah sure, if you don’t count initial socialization as cohersian than no cohersian should be nessisary. One could make the prediction that we are not only devolping in this direction politically, but are actually evolveing this way. That in another meillenia or so that a baby will be as ready to recivce complete social programing as today they are ready to recive language. We’ll develop into very ant like beings. There will be very few descisions for an indivisual that will be much less than obvious, but we will not lose our intelligence as it will be emergant in the larger system. Humanity will be able to react to new circumstances even if indivisuals lose that ability. Communications will play a big role. I imagen some sort of pager will be implanted in the jaw near birth to allow for easy and instantanous communication. And of course the point, there will be no crime, and no need for one person to display force to another- the wheels of society will be well greased, and freedom will abound.
P.S. Man that site is disorginized, I’m trying but it will take me a while to figure out what he is saying. And that angle about made my head asplode as I was trying to read. Love the frog story tho.
I see ya, LostGuy.
Your point is valid.
I suggest that each child would want the rewards of peace, tranquility, and harmony, however the child would be free to rebel, and if sufficiently capable, can make his way as he sees fit. If he is charismatic enough, maybe he can rule the earth for a time, but that doesn’t change the fact that forcing somebody to comply is wrong.
Forcing him to comply with the generally accepted ‘good behavior’ would be contrary to the absolute freedom credo, as would forcing a parent to feed an unruly child. The fruit of the parent’s labor belongs to the parent, if he chooses to starve the child into submission, the only thing stoping him is the child’s freedom to leave.
One of life’s greatest freedoms is the freedom to be an ass, without that, not being an ass loses value.
Please pardon our construction, I’ve put 25 years of study into a few months of computer literacy and it shows, thank you for bearing with us.
It’s true it would work well most of the time. And I’m not sure I could really regect such a world. After all it is better that no one wants to kill, then forceing people not to kill.
But back to the miniscule adcedemics of it all. This boy is intersting. You say he would have the right to leave, and make his own way. This I like a lot. Probably the best quick measure of the freedom of a society is how easy it would be to leave if one wanted. But does he really have this right? Well, only if their are aproximately 10 square Kilometers of vibrant land which he could feed off of. And he would have to be at least 12 to have a snowballs chance.
I think where we really disagree is the cause of the lack of freedom. You seem to think it comes from poor moral choices of past and current people. I think it is a direct consequence of their being more people than 10k squares of good land. What are you going to do if this boy demands is fair share of the landvalue of the entire globe? Do you have an explination for him why 1% of the world owns most of the worlds stuff? I don’t think it was their own industriousness. (Just so you know haveing one’s fair share of the landvalue of the globe would make someone richer than most.)
If we could somehow reduce the population, or maybe explore space- this could all work out.
I think it is wrong to force a person to do anything other than his responsibilities enforce upon him. In everything other than his responsibilites, he must be the judge and the decision maker. Of course, it is vital that we all know and distinguish between what our responsibilities are and what aren’t.
12km of land seems excessive to me. Not that I’ve gathered many statistics, but I have an article that tells how to make one’s self self-sufficient on an acre of land. It doesn’t go much past subsistence, but it will feed a person.htp://www.kurtsaxon.com
My question for the boy is ‘Why does he think he has any value coming simply because he lives?’ If he worked and earned his place, that’s one thing, but to just have it handed to him? Only in the inheiritence lottery.
Whether we depopulate or expand our horizons, we still have to get along in the space provided, and as long as you can use force to make me comply with your ideal, there will be conflict.
Thank you BeenaJain. Do you have a list of these responsibilities?
Funny, very funny! Your goal in life is something irresponsible, therefore babu sahib, for you NOT to do this irresponsible thing cannot be wrong.