A Different Use Of The Word "Freedom"

[single eye]

Srry quatona, right and wrong were not issues in play, excuse the error. I said nothing about your awareness or lack thereof of any fact? The issue of better options being available to us than we are consciously aware of needs to be addressed. Often we are reluctant to make decisions because we are not confident that any of the options being considered will meet or exceed expectations.

 

[quatona]

Srry quatona, right and wrong were not issues in play, excuse the error.

No biggie.

I said nothing about your awareness or lack thereof of any fact?

If I understood you correctly, you were implying that my suggestion for the use of the word "freedom" somehow ignored the fact of ambivalence. (Did I misunderstand you there?)
I, however, am aware of ambivalence and don´t feel that my suggestion ignores it.

The issue of better options being available to us than we are consciously aware of needs to be addressed.

Sure, I agree: they need to be addressed.

Often we are reluctant to make decisions because we are not confident that any of the options being considered will meet or exceed expectations.

Yes, agreed.

So?

 

[single eye]

so? So would it not seem a good idea to discuss what to do to find those better options rather than give up and procrastinate?

 

[quatona]

so? So would it not seem a good idea to discuss what to do to find those better options rather than give up and procrastinate?

Yes. I would be very surprised to learn that I advocated giving up and/or procrastinating, or spoke against a discussion about what to do to find better options.
We seem to talk past each other.

 

[elopez]

Maybe the confusion would go away if you´d realize that I am not talking about freedom, but about the word "freedom"?

Yes, yet what about the word freedom? You've defined it. You're discussing the definition and the implications. It really does seem like you're talking about more than just the word itself. If anything that brings more confusion.

Sure, if we change the use of a word, it will carry different connotations.
It does not, however, mean that our view of reality or our philosophical convictions change.

And I'm not saying it does.

Something about my answer seemed to be unsatisfactory, though.

To you or me? I'd rather understand the above first.

 

[quatona]

Yes, yet what about the word freedom? You've defined it. You're discussing the definition and the implications. It really does seem like you're talking about more than just the word itself. If anything that brings more confusion.

I have no idea how I could possibly help you get rid of your confusion, at this point. Sorry.

 

[single eye]

quatona, You wrote, "I'd always reccomend to add, I am not free to do it now or, I can do this not yet". Does this not sound like advocating procrastination to you?

 

[quatona]

quatona, You wrote, "I'd always reccomend to add, I am not free to do it now or, I can do this not yet". Does this not sound like advocating procrastination to you?

Yes, it doesn´t sound like that to me, and even less like advocating "giving up".
It doesn´t sound like "I am not willing to do what is necessary and to my disposal in order to become able to do what I can´t do yet".

 

[single eye]

quatona, you are not giving any indication as to how what is stopping us is to be overcome. Where is the resolution coming from? Are we to wait for an epiphany? In the real world I live in, things that go unresolved and moved to the back burner tend to get ignored and replaced by other things. Maybe it is just me, but that sounds exactly like procrastination whick is a euphemism for quitting or giving up. I have never found better options by saying "I am not free to do this now or, I can do this not yet"? Have you?

 

[quatona]

quatona, you are not giving any indication as to how what is stopping us is to be overcome.

Correct. Just like I am not giving any indication as how to play a decent high backhand in Badminton, or how to tune a guitar. And you aren´t either.
And the reason is: All these things aren´t the topic of this thread.

Where is the resolution coming from? Are we to wait for an epiphany?

Interesting topic and question! If you want to discuss it, you may want to create a thread for it, and - time permitting - I might participate in it.

In the real world I live in, things that go unresolved and moved to the back burner tend to get ignored and replaced by other things. Maybe it is just me, but that sounds exactly like procrastination whick is a euphemism for quitting or giving up.

That doesn´t sound good.
You aren´t seriously expecting me to defend what you perceive in the real world you live in, are you?

I have never found better options by saying "I am not free to do this now or, I can do this not yet"? Have you?

I have found it to be a good starting point.

 

[quatona]

dp

 

[single eye]

quatona, "I have found it a good starting point". Starting things is easy, it is bringing them to satisfying conclusions that seems elusive. If you are satisfied with starting points and not interested in the satisfying conclusions, then I will leave you to it.

 

[quatona]

quatona, "I have found it a good starting point". Starting things is easy, it is bringing them to satisfying conclusions that seems elusive.

Indeed, even though starting things isn´t always, either.

If you are satisfied with starting points and not interested in the satisfying conclusions, then I will leave you to it.

Maybe you want to re-read the OP. It wasn´t meant or pretending to offer a solution to all problems in the world, or even only a conclusive method for getting things done.
The fact that it isn´t such a method doesn´t mean that I am not interested in all that it isn´t.

Thus, yes, I agree: A different use of the word "freedom" isn´t a complete and conclusive method for getting things done (along with a lot of other things it won´t help with).

I am, however, wondering what made you expect it to be that, in the first place.

IOW: you keep barking up the wrong tree.

 

[single eye]

If wanting satisfying conclusions to life's issues is "barking up the wrong tree" then yes, I am certainly guilty. Forgive me for thinking this might be of interest to you.

 

[quatona]

If wanting satisfying conclusions to life's issues is "barking up the wrong tree" then yes, I am certainly guilty. Forgive me for thinking this might be of interest to you.

What is hard to understand about "This is not the topic of this thread"? and about the difference between "This isn´t what I was talking about and aren´t going to talk about because it´s derailing the thread and focusing on something that´s entirely irrelevant in regards to my suggestion" and "This is of no interest to me"?
What is it with you and persistently making assumptions about my mindset, and ascribing implications to my suggestion that it clearly doesn´t have?

 

[JJM]

Sorry for coming back to this after it has died. I've been very busy and unable to get caught up on it.

Quotana, I mean this in due charity, you may as well have started a thread which said "It seems useful and reasonable for most every purpose and intent to consider an animal to be bovine if it is in the family Equidae" and then objected whenever someone suggested you were confusing a cow for a horse on the grounds that it wasn't semantic enough of a suggestion.

It seems to me that that on a semantic level your definition is not "useful or reasonable" because we have a word "freedom" in the English language and close corresponding words in other languages and your definition is close enough to what we normally mean to constantly be confused for it but far enough away that it does not account for all of the uses we normally mean. Outside of a strict ad hoc circumstance with which you have not provided us, it can only be useful if it is to be used in something like a therapeutic context (which has been behind much of the discussion in this thread), but here still it can only help if it deceives people into thinking they are actually talking about what we normally mean by "freedom."

 

[quatona]

Sorry for coming back to this after it has died. I've been very busy and unable to get caught up on it.

Quotana, I mean this in due charity, you may as well have started a thread which said "It seems useful and reasonable for most every purpose and intent to consider an animal to be bovine if it is in the family Equidae" and then objected whenever someone suggested you were confusing a cow for a horse on the grounds that it wasn't semantic enough of a suggestion.

Yes, in a way I suggested a new, different classification. Then again, it´s not THAT new.
I´m not sure I understand the second part of your sentence. Maybe you can reword it for me?
I don´t recall "objecting" to anyone´s use of the word "freedom". Everyone is still free to use it as they see fit.

I did, however, object to certain understandings of the human psyche. Which, of course, is the actual topic behind the suggestion.

It seems to me that that on a semantic level your definition is not "useful or reasonable" because we have a word "freedom" in the English language and close corresponding words in other languages and your definition is close enough to what we normally mean to constantly be confused for it but far enough away that it does not account for all of the uses we normally mean.

You are saying this as if there weren´t already a huge variety of meanings in which the word "freedom" is used.
But, yes, the risk of adding ever new definitions is always an even greater confusion. That´s why I didn´t silently use it in a misunderstandable definition, but did the very opposite: I explained it.
On another note, I am fully aware that the commonly accepted meaning of words doesn´t change by decree or by suggestion.

Outside of a strict ad hoc circumstance with which you have not provided us, it can only be useful if it is to be used in something like a therapeutic context (which has been behind much of the discussion in this thread),

That´s an important point: The meaning in which the word "freedom" is used depends greatly on the context. It´s been that way before I made my suggestion, though.

but here still it can only help if it deceives people into thinking they are actually talking about what we normally mean by "freedom."

Who is "we", and what is this - apparently contextlessly - unified way in which these "we" use and understand the word?