prophex
I have not experienced true freedom once, in my life. I have been under something that seems free, that people tell me is free, that schools teach is free, that media forces onto me as free. Should I have to settle for such freedom? For the seemingly free? For "the best that there is yet", for systems that are designed to keep me thinking that I am truly free? For propaganda, and wars all centered on essentially maintaining our "free" system, the "free" way of things. If I was to be truly free, things would be different.
Should you have to settle for such freedom? No. The world is full of places where you can go and be free of the restraints of society, but you propbably are not willing to pay the price of entry into that world. If you wish to do so you must be entirely self sufficient and ready to face the world without the support of the structure of society.
You would have to be capable of finding and maintaining shelter, feeding yourself through foraging and hunting.You would have to be able to make your own clothing, to mend broken bones, to withstand pain when you are ill, to take care of your own waste, etc....
The point being is that you are completely dependant upon the society around you. Do not be so hasty to rid yourself of it.
We wouldn't need leaders, leaders like Bismarck, Napolean, Bush, Hitler, and Charlemagne. We wouldn't need leaders and the games they play with our lives, like chess. I wouldn't be less than a pawn in this absurdity, far less than what a pawn would mean to the leader. A simple person, a simple student, someone without any influence globally on my own situation, and the situation of those that I know. To be free, the games that leaders conduct globally would have to be eradicated. Because until then, we would be stuck in the system, stuck at the bottom of it, into a hierarchy filled with others born into position, and unable to change it at all.
You seek to change the world into what? If you were in power and at the controls how would you guide a nation? How would you give people the means to support themselves and have choices by which they might enjoy their lives? Do you , for one minute,think that there is not a price to pay for the power of having the responsibilty of such position? Please explain how you would make the world a better place.
To be free, governments themselves would have to be stopped, we could not have groups of potential leaders, powerful people at the head of decision making for our own well-being. We would have to control it.
Who is we in this context son? If "we" controlled it would "we" not then become the government you so despise? You assume much of the ideal in your talk ,please explain how "we" would run the show. How would we decide on something like how best to distribute the world grain supply?
You wish to contol it but you give no understanding of
how you would control it.
There would be no democratic voting, because voting is a less than fruitful experience, ending in a choice for the better of the 2, or 3, or 400, leaders and groups. The better of, is not the best, the best is when one controls his or her own destiny totally.
Ok. Please explain how you would feed yourself without the support of those around you. When winter hit New York what would you do without heat since you are determined to control your own destiny?
There would be no need for these out-dated systems. There would be no towns. There would be no cities. There would be no counties. There would be no countries. There would be only the earth, as it is.
There would be no borders to decide the strongest, or superior of systems. No borders to control where we go, what we see, or who we talk with. No borders to increase "Nationalism", which in turn means that there would be no feelings for the extension of power on a scale that effects millions in other places in the world.
No maps with areas carved into them to control everything that we are, and do, to classify all of humanity, limiting the freedom to be truly oneself and not to be called an American, a Frenchman, or a German
And once we have no borders and titles {which are artificial anyway} what makes you think that this changes the nature of the world and the practical problems of people and their impact on the world?
There would be no societies, used as platforms to endorse and promote the ideas of a few brilliant people and to subjugate others to the ideas of these few.
Freedom in this sense would entail the thinking of oneself, and to be seperate from the ideas of others if he or she wanted. But in societies which subcribe to governments, and economic systems, we are tied to these ideas, and are destined to be never truly free.
True freedom would also mean that there would be no economic systems, because there would be no need for money, no need for primitive currencies to buy and sell, all of which limits the freedoms of the people, forced to use the system constructed or be a hopeless starving wanderer.
There would be no occupations, no jobs, no pre-destined purposes, which never never never are what anybody ever thought for themselves to do with their lives. There would not be systems to give people things to do, to keep people from realizing the absurdity of this existance, to keep people trapped in their secure daily lives of money, and of family. To make sure that noone realizes that there is no meaningful purpose, no individuals must give up on the established way of things.
How would you feed yourself? On air? Who would do the work? Some other guy right? Who would supply the housing for you to live in? Who would build the shelters and supply the heat to survive for those cold New York winters eh?
Methinks you engage in absurdity you are not aware of friend.
Because once one knows that we are here in this abyss of existance and without clear purpose, one realizes that there are no purposes of any merit, or value. Because there is nothing that we can do that means anything because there are no standards. There is no guideline, there are no rules. All there is, is existing, and to wonder for what, and why, and to not know.
Then people begin to know that there is only one path that makes any sense. The path to transcendance, to true freedom.
And then one realizes that all of the existance that everyone else is in, that all the silly humans participate in, the existance of societies, and of governments, and of power, and of money, is the worst reality that could be realized. Because it seperates one from all of it. It makes recluses, people who can't socialize with others on mindless levels of small talk about sports, and business. It makes people commit suicide, and it makes truly intelligent individuals.
What the hell do you mean by "transendance"? Are we talking along the lines of Heaven's Gate or what?
You seem to think that the life you are living is not to your liking and that the world owes you something. Here's a game plan. Take your sorry ass to a war zone and I am sure you will find many who are willing to help you "transcend" the world you so depise yet whose tit you still suck on.
When you no longer walk on the backs of working men that support your right to the freedom you despise get back to me and then we might have a reasonable discussion.
It makes people want true freedom, but realize that it's not even worth it, because we will die in this existance, this place of mental torment, of no meaning. Where people take occupations to have false purpose rather than no purpose at all. Albert Camus' summation of life for many in the Sisyphus myth, where one finds purpose in meaningless tasks such as jobs, or occupations within an economy, that although Sisyphus pushes the rock up the hill for it to fall again, which is absurd (as are all jobs) he finds purpose in the task. This is as most humans behave, to find purpose in business, and in science, and in mathematics, in teaching, in anything, as meaningless as it all is, because these jobs do not matter, and they have no value. Many simply go through the system because they have not realized that their entire existance has been without meaning. Or they don't want to, and close their minds to ideas about the meaning of life, and the purpose of humanity's existance.
This thread started with "true freedom", but I feel that true freedom only exists outside what we see in the physical world, and is only present within our minds. Freedom is in transcending what is real, as did Siddhartha, and Christ.
The only valid purpose that one can speak of, a purpose with any meaning at all is a purpose that Christ spoke of, to love the rest of your kind in this absurd existance. Because there is nothing else that is good and righteous to live for.
Let us seek this freedom called truth, for nothing in this existance can ever be meaningful except for knowing why. Knowing why we are here, and why we exist. That's
true freedom.
Please explain how the sceanrio you propose allows the hungry to be fed,the naked to be clothed, the cold to be warmed. You make the case for a world of complete freedom and love but you cannot help people in this life without the work of others, which is what jobs entail.
You find no purpose in life for which I pity you since you obviously are in turmoil.However, just because the world
is meaningless, does not mean that you cannot have purpose and direction. It just means that you have to create it through
hard work and sacrifice of your freedoms since this is what
love entails.
I am always amazed at how many people think that purpose is seperate from living itself.
Dear Mrs Chown, Ignore your son's attempts to teach you physics. Physics isn't the most important thing. Love is.
Best wishes, Richard Feynman.
™ Version 4.2
