UK Today

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
RWStanding
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 12:23 pm

UK Today

Post by RWStanding »

UK Today
Our present convention of dividing politics-ethics in linear way is clearly simplistic.
This country today, in ethical-political terms, is at least a fairly stable and law-abiding society. Setting lawless-chaos aside that leaves what is bound to be a compromise between three end-values or forms of society – in a triangular layout.
Between what may approximately be described as anarchism, tyranny, and altruism.
Freedom, for instance, is a value shared by anarchism and altruism. Duty is shared between altruism and tyranny. Ego is shared between tyranny and anarchism.
We have what is described as a compromise between individual liberty, and the state, with a reference to altruism that is really as a ‘nice’ form of anarchism in which everyone is abjured to love their neighbour misinterpreted as an egalitarian love-in.
We employ ‘things’ such as money, as if they are values. Whereas it is purpose of things that denote the value.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 2215
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: UK Today

Post by RCSaunders »

RWStanding wrote: Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:39 am We employ ‘things’ such as money, as if they are values.
Do you mean things like food, medicine, tools, and machines don't have value? Do you mean things like knowledge, history, chemistry, physics, and language don't have value? If things don't have value, what does? Money is just a medium of exchange for such, "things," isn't it?
Post Reply