Freedom (Poll)

Paradoxum · Apr 25, 2013

I know this probably isn't helpful, but I don't know. I don't understand what freedom means in this context. I lean towards saying there is less freedom because they are less free time, but I feel like I could easily be too simplistic. So I don't feel that confident in voting.

(I haven't voted and I consider myself liberal)

Rion · Apr 25, 2013

Received said:
Then you don't need to take part in the discussion. That's not snarky; I just don't think there's a need to get frustrated with something you see as silly.

I think it's a bit defensive for you not even to try and respond to an Internet poll, silly or not. But that's okay.

I'm honestly waiting for the other shoe to drop or it to make sense. So, they force you to stay/work longer, refuse to pay you for it, and you have no recourse, correct?

Received · Apr 25, 2013

Paradoxum said:
I know this probably isn't helpful, but I don't know. I don't understand what freedom means in this context. I lean towards saying there is less freedom because they are less free time, but I feel like I could easily be too simplistic. So I don't feel that confident in voting.

(I haven't voted and I consider myself liberal)

It is simplistic, but in this case it looks like you're say their freedom changed.

Received · Apr 25, 2013

Rion said:
I'm honestly waiting for the other shoe to drop or it to make sense. So, they force you to stay/work longer, refuse to pay you for it, and you have no recourse, correct?

Right. "Force" is too strong a word. You can even imagine the argument that nobody forced you to take this job or stay in this country; and even if all jobs were mysteriously synchronized to have the same level of freedom regarding minutes for lunch, you're still choosing to work in this context -- in this country. Nobody is forcing you to do anything.

Or are they? If you think the limit of time for lunch is somehow forcing you in terms of limiting your choice or liberty, then that's an answer.

Received · Apr 25, 2013

Lol, who was the goose who put the "obvious set up backfire" tag on this thread?

Harpuia · Apr 25, 2013

Problem is I can't vote because I technically am a moderate (barely right-lean). So what do I do?

ThatRobGuy · Apr 25, 2013

I'm torn on how to answer because I think we have to define "freedom".

There's work freedom, and American freedom...they're two different things.

When you're on the clock for an employer, you freely chose to agree to their terms of your employment.

Saying that them cutting my lunch hour was losing freedom would be the same as saying that I'm losing my freedom because they tell me I can't listen to music with offensive lyrics at my desk anymore because it's bothering other people. An office environment isn't a constitutional republic like our country is, so I don't have that expectation.

The fact that in this scenario, there are no other jobs to go to, doesn't magnify the situation because you still have the free choice to quit the job, live in the woods, and forage for berries if that's what you want to do.

Are you losing work freedom?, yes....your American freedom?, no

I ended up voting "libertarian, freedom didn't change".

I do find the results of the poll quite telling though...over half of the people voted "liberal, my freedom changed"...if the voting trend stays the same as this goes on, it really speaks to how some liberals view employment and its purpose.

Touma · Apr 25, 2013

miniverchivi said:
I'm torn on how to answer because I think we have to define "freedom".

There's work freedom, and American freedom...they're two different things.

When you're on the clock for an employer, you freely chose to agree to their terms of your employment.

Saying that them cutting my lunch hour was losing freedom would be the same as saying that I'm losing my freedom because they tell me I can't listen to music with offensive lyrics at my desk anymore because it's bothering other people. An office environment isn't a constitutional republic like our country is, so I don't have that expectation.

The fact that in this scenario, there are no other jobs to go to, doesn't magnify the situation because you still have the free choice to quit the job, live in the woods, and forage for berries if that's what you want to do.

Are you losing work freedom?, yes....your American freedom?, no

I ended up voting "libertarian, freedom didn't change".

I do find the results of the poll quite telling though...over half of the people voted "liberal, my freedom changed"...if the voting trend stays the same as this goes on, it really speaks to how some liberals view employment and its purpose.

I self identify as liberal. I was the lone wolf to say "no it didn't change"

Received · Apr 25, 2013

miniverchivi said:
I'm torn on how to answer because I think we have to define "freedom".

There's work freedom, and American freedom...they're two different things.

When you're on the clock for an employer, you freely chose to agree to their terms of your employment.

Saying that them cutting my lunch hour was losing freedom would be the same as saying that I'm losing my freedom because they tell me I can't listen to music with offensive lyrics at my desk anymore because it's bothering other people. An office environment isn't a constitutional republic like our country is, so I don't have that expectation.

The fact that in this scenario, there are no other jobs to go to, doesn't magnify the situation because you still have the free choice to quit the job, live in the woods, and forage for berries if that's what you want to do.

Are you losing work freedom?, yes....your American freedom?, no

I think understanding what freedom means -- defining it -- is the function of the poll. The point is to get at what people think freedom means, because I think perhaps more than anything else in politics, the philosophical and definitive differences between liberals, conservatives, and libertarians regarding liberty is a huge pivot point for determining where you end up allying yourself.

I ended up voting "libertarian, freedom didn't change".

I do find the results of the poll quite telling though...over half of the people voted "liberal, my freedom changed"...if the voting trend stays the same as this goes on, it really speaks to how some liberals view employment and its purpose.

Yes, that fulfills what I expected. But it doesn't just speak to employment and its purpose, given that the OP example is a hypothetical and allegorical. It says something about the liberals' understanding of freedom.

Now if only the conservatives would stop avoiding this thread and help me understand them.

ThatRobGuy · Apr 25, 2013

Touma said:
I self identify as liberal. I was the lone wolf to say "no it didn't change"

Are you sure you're a liberal?

ThatRobGuy · Apr 25, 2013

Received said:
Yes, that fulfills what I expected. But it doesn't just speak to employment and its purpose, given that the OP example is a hypothetical and allegorical. It says something about the liberals' understanding of freedom.

Now if only the conservatives would stop avoiding this thread and help me understand them.

Well, I do see where some conservatives other than myself have voted...it's possible that they just don't have anything to elaborate on in terms of their vote.

...however, I think I can speak for most conservatives in terms of the difference between liberal & conservatives when it comes to how employment is viewed.

"what can I do for my company" vs. "what can my company do for me"
(how's that for presidential

)

another way of wording it would be...

"A company's responsibility is to its customers"
vs
"A company's responsibility is to its employees"

In terms of freedom, I would say a person would be equally limited in a unionized shop as they would be in a non-unionized shop...its just different aspects that get limited.

If we break it down to its essence, having a job period is a limitation of freedom...because you're giving part of yourself in exchange for a paycheck. Nobody really wants to work a full time job...if the option were available to live your current lifestyle without having to work...I don't know anyone who wouldn't make that trade...thus the reason retirement is viewed as a milestone.

The two sides just have different agendas pertaining to how they're going to achieve the goal of maximum enjoyment and minimum work.

USincognito · Apr 26, 2013

O Moderate: I was told there wasn't going to be any math on the test.

^--- I'll check this one.

AirPo · Apr 27, 2013

Touma said:
I self identify as liberal. I was the lone wolf to say "no it didn't change"

Sorry I'm late. I voted liberal/did not change.

SolomonVII · Apr 27, 2013

My freedom didn't change. The totalitarian state that the OP sets up makes all decisions for me. They changed their decision. I am compelled by that totalitarian system to go along with their changes, just as I was compelled to go along with their decisions before they altered them.
In all cases, I am not free. Policy is dictated to me.

Boondock_Saint · Apr 27, 2013

Does my freedom change because I have less of something?

Well that depends on two things. Who is deciding how much less I get.
Me?
If it is not me, than my freedom is changed. If it was me who chose, than I have more freedom.

Seeing how I would have no choice in the "Lunch" matter than I would say I have less freedom if the choice is not mine. However, if other people could only have lunch if I had lunch the choice would be mine and not theirs.

I can't tell if we are talking about taxes or abortion. What does "Lunch" really mean?

Received · Apr 27, 2013

SolomonVII said:
My freedom didn't change. The totalitarian state that the OP sets up makes all decisions for me. They changed their decision. I am compelled by that totalitarian system to go along with their changes, just as I was compelled to go along with their decisions before they altered them.
In all cases, I am not free. Policy is dictated to me.

So you have no ability to make more than one possible choice? Eat lunch for two minutes, three minutes, ten minutes, fifteen minutes; eat it at X place, Y place, Z place; choose not to eat it; when to eat it; etc.?

SolomonVII · Apr 28, 2013

Received said:
So you have no ability to make more than one possible choice? Eat lunch for two minutes, three minutes, ten minutes, fifteen minutes; eat it at X place, Y place, Z place; choose not to eat it; when to eat it; etc.?

The scenario you set up is that you are not the ones that make the ultimate decisions, but that the Man is.
I liken the scenario you set up to maybe the Hebrew slaves in Egypt who the pharoah increased their quotas and decreased their supplies in response to Moses. another example would be the house slaves versus the field slaves in the colloquial language of American blacks today.

Could we possibly say that the Egyptian slaves were more free with a more leisurely schedule, or that the house slaves are more free that the field slaves.

I would submit that no we cannot say that, any more than we could say a woman with child is more pregnant further into the pregnancy.

What has been varied is not the amount of freedom, but the amount of oppression.

Freedom entails the right to a voice, and the ability to make that voice heard and have influence.In contrast to that are those who must listen. The sweetness of the voice in their ear does not make them more free, only less oppressed.

Received · Apr 29, 2013

SolomonVII said:
The scenario you set up is that you are not the ones that make the ultimate decisions, but that the Man is.

Nobody mentioned the Man in this video, but Man or not, you still have freedom. Viktor Frankl rightly and with dignity argued for human freedom to extend beyond external action, beyond internal action, to the very attitudes we have toward the world. And he formulated this in the midst of Auschwitz, where he noticed his friends who "gave up" with an attitude of resignation had a much higher chance of ending up dying well before those who had a meaning, and therefore a hopeful attitude, to live for beyond the camps.

Theirs was an infinitely worse situation than any Orwellian nightmare, and, alas, the point of this thread isn't to the Man at all. It's just a hypothetical.

Could we possibly say that the Egyptian slaves were more free with a more leisurely schedule, or that the house slaves are more free that the field slaves.

Yes.

I would submit that no we cannot say that, any more than we could say a woman with child is more pregnant further into the pregnancy.

What has been varied is not the amount of freedom, but the amount of oppression.

Freedom entails the right to a voice, and the ability to make that voice heard and have influence.In contrast to that are those who must listen. The sweetness of the voice in their ear does not make them more free, only less oppressed.

I think your conception looks backward from a sort of libertarian political conception of freedom, rather than neutrally at a question of what fundamentally constitutes freedom. Not the freedom for external movement or (as you seem to hold) the freedom to have a preferable state of affairs, but the ability, quite simply, to change your very inward states and attitudes. "Be transformed by the renewing of our minds..." Freedom begins inwardly.

SolomonVII · Apr 30, 2013

Received said:
Nobody mentioned the Man in this video, but Man or not, you still have freedom. Viktor Frankl rightly and with dignity argued for human freedom to extend beyond external action, beyond internal action, to the very attitudes we have toward the world. And he formulated this in the midst of Auschwitz, where he noticed his friends who "gave up" with an attitude of resignation had a much higher chance of ending up dying well before those who had a meaning, and therefore a hopeful attitude, to live for beyond the camps.

Theirs was an infinitely worse situation than any Orwellian nightmare, and, alas, the point of this thread isn't to the Man at all. It's just a hypothetical.

Yes.

I think your conception looks backward from a sort of libertarian political conception of freedom, rather than neutrally at a question of what fundamentally constitutes freedom. Not the freedom for external movement or (as you seem to hold) the freedom to have a preferable state of affairs, but the ability, quite simply, to change your very inward states and attitudes. "Be transformed by the renewing of our minds..." Freedom begins inwardly.

I am not sure I understand.
II wasn't responding to any video.
I was responding to the OP scenario.
As I understood it, there were no right or wrong answers, or this wasn't supposed to be a gotcha thing, but just a respectful understanding of differences.

The Man is not your term, or any videos term, wherever that video might be.
I was merely responding to the OP scenario according to my own understanding of it in my own words.
The Man in this case would be whoever is setting the rules not just for the company, but for every single company that exists. I would assume that this would be a closed system, and this is how it would have to be for everybody.

As for the philosophical idea that freedom is a state of mind, well then any hypothetical situation wouldn't matter, as it is exterior to the whole process of internal being any way.

Jesus was never freer than when he was being marched up to Golgotha, every step another step across the threshhold into the kingdom of heaven, from that point of view.

Received · Apr 30, 2013

SolomonVII said:
I am not sure I understand.
II wasn't responding to any video.
I was responding to the OP scenario.
As I understood it, there were no right or wrong answers, or this wasn't supposed to be a gotcha thing, but just a respectful understanding of differences.

The Man is not your term, or any videos term, wherever that video might be.
I was merely responding to the OP scenario according to my own understanding of it in my own words.
The Man in this case would be whoever is setting the rules not just for the company, but for every single company that exists. I would assume that this would be a closed system, and this is how it would have to be for everybody.

Sorry. I hear The Man, and I think, well, The Man, man.

As for the philosophical idea that freedom is a state of mind, well then any hypothetical situation wouldn't matter, as it is exterior to the whole process of internal being any way.

Jesus was never freer than when he was being marched up to Golgotha, every step another step across the threshhold into the kingdom of heaven, from that point of view.

I think your use of "freer" implicitly goes with what I'm trying to say. I'm saying that freedom most essentially is a state of mind, but also that there are varying degrees of freedom. Freedom to just change your attitudes when you can't change your circumstances is the most limited freedom, whereas freedom to change your attitude, other inward states, and actually have external effects that can be changed from your will are each deeper levels of freedom. But not all the way, of course: people can have an infinite amount of external freedom and still be in slavery. Take the Biblical idea: people are slaves to sin, even though externally they appear free -- most free if your definition of freedom is external action. Just 'cause you're moving doesn't make you free. You could be sleepwalking.

Freedom (Poll)

Given the scenario above, did your freedom change (decrease/increase) or not?

My freedom CHANGED, and I'm conservative

My freedom CHANGED, and I'm liberal

My freedom CHANGED, and I'm libertarian

My freedom DIDN'T change, and I'm conservative

My freedom DIDN'T change, and I'm liberal

My freedom DIDN'T change, and I'm libertarian

Liberty, Equality, Solidarity!

Annuit Cœptis

True love waits in haunted attics

True love waits in haunted attics

True love waits in haunted attics

Oldie... very very oldie...

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

True love waits in haunted attics

Part of the IT crowd

Part of the IT crowd

a post by Alan Smithee

with a Touch of Grey

Well-Known Member

Member since 2006.

True love waits in haunted attics

Well-Known Member

True love waits in haunted attics

Well-Known Member

True love waits in haunted attics

Similar threads