Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Mar 01, 2020 11:28 pm
Sorry...which "example"?
You indicated that some do not answer to the collective and need it for survival.
Show any person that does not need others for survival.
Regards
DL
A survivalist doesn’t need to rely on others and can even make his own shoes.
He needs someone to train him and hold the camera.
I guess that once trained, such a person could survive, but after his death, he would have no progeny to carry on, if he did not show to a female that he was not free to reproduce without her.
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:00 pm
Do we all answer to the collective
No, we don't.
"Collectivism" means the aggregation of individuals into a mass, and their subsequent treatment as if they were a solid block with a single will. It's an illusion, a phony construct that denies individuality.
We don't have to answer to any "collective" at all. We can answer to our fellow citizens as fellow citizens and as unique individuals...and they can answer to us. We can help each other with common needs, and in non-common areas, leave each other free to pursue a good life.
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 3:16 pm
You indicated that some do not answer to the collective and need it for survival.
I did not say that. If I said anything you took to mean that, it was, perhaps, poorly put.
Perhaps you should quote the passage from which you are misunderstanding that, so I can clarify.
Do we all answer to the collective and can you live without doing so?
If not, and using you as an example, who would make your food and shoes?
Have you noted in all those, live off the land programs, that they always have rifles, chain saws etc.?
Regards
DL
The program, Naked and Afraid - Alone, on Discovery Channel, will give you an idea how it’s done without rifles or chain saws. What little the participants bring (e.g., a fire starter, a cutting tool or a pot) could be fabricated out of natural resources.
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:54 pm
I did not indicate that all our rules are opposite to freedom, but if you have to follow them, then you are not free of them, thus have no real freedom. You are just free to follow the rules, which is not freedom.
Regards
DL
But you do not have to follow social rules. You can steal, even murder, and either get away with it or face the consequences. You can be late for important business meetings and either be permitted to continue doing this or possibly be fired from your job. But you are free to ignore society’s rules and therefore you can possess freedom from society.
No argument.
I have put that caveat above somewhere, where I said we are free to break the rules, but then have to live with the consequences.
I think I put it where I said I broke the law to challenge it, and lost because the law cheated.
Even while doing it, I was not fully free as I cannot make shoes or grow my own food.
Regards
DL
Naked and Afraid: make shoes, yes; grow food, no, but acquire food, yes by means of hunting, fishing and trapping.
commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:16 pm
The program, Naked and Afraid - Alone, on Discovery Channel, will give you an idea how it’s done without rifles or chain saws. What little the participants bring (e.g., a fire starter, a cutting tool or a pot) could be fabricated out of natural resources.
In those shows, they also put people in situations in which success is more likely than death. Like, they put them in the tropics, on an island, perhaps. Try putting them "naked and afraid" in Minnesota in the winter, and let's see how long they last. It would be measured in minutes.
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Sun Mar 01, 2020 5:54 pm
I did not indicate that all our rules are opposite to freedom, but if you have to follow them, then you are not free of them, thus have no real freedom. You are just free to follow the rules, which is not freedom.
Regards
DL
But you do not have to follow social rules. You can steal, even murder, and either get away with it or face the consequences. You can be late for important business meetings and either be permitted to continue doing this or possibly be fired from your job. But you are free to ignore society’s rules and therefore you can possess freedom from society.
No argument.
I have put that caveat above somewhere, where I said we are free to break the rules, but then have to live with the consequences.
I think I put it where I said I broke the law to challenge it, and lost because the law cheated.
Even while doing it, I was not fully free as I cannot make shoes or grow my own food.
commonsense wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:16 pm
The program, Naked and Afraid - Alone, on Discovery Channel, will give you an idea how it’s done without rifles or chain saws. What little the participants bring (e.g., a fire starter, a cutting tool or a pot) could be fabricated out of natural resources.
In those shows, they also put people in situations in which success is more likely than death. Like, they put them in the tropics, on an island, perhaps. Try putting them "naked and afraid" in Minnesota in the winter, and let's see how long they last. It would be measured in minutes.
Thanks for the reminder that this so-called reality show is as contrived as any other.
Actually, they’ve also put duo’s in Alaska and northern parts of Europe when snow was falling. I think a survivalist would migrate to a temperate climate.
Yet no one is asked to live alone in these conditions longer than 3 weeks.
Greatest I am wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 6:00 pm
Do we all answer to the collective
No, we don't.
"Collectivism" means the aggregation of individuals into a mass, and their subsequent treatment as if they were a solid block with a single will. It's an illusion, a phony construct that denies individuality.
We don't have to answer to any "collective" at all. We can answer to our fellow citizens as fellow citizens and as unique individuals...and they can answer to us. We can help each other with common needs, and in non-common areas, leave each other free to pursue a good life.
That's ideal.
If you cannot see the analogy between collective and groupof citizens, then ---------
Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Mar 02, 2020 4:53 pm
I did not say that. If I said anything you took to mean that, it was, perhaps, poorly put.
Perhaps you should quote the passage from which you are misunderstanding that, so I can clarify.
Do we all answer to the collective and can you live without doing so?
If not, and using you as an example, who would make your food and shoes?
Have you noted in all those, live off the land programs, that they always have rifles, chain saws etc.?
Regards
DL
The program, Naked and Afraid - Alone, on Discovery Channel, will give you an idea how it’s done without rifles or chain saws. What little the participants bring (e.g., a fire starter, a cutting tool or a pot) could be fabricated out of natural resources.
Sure, except they used store bought items.
The last such episode I watched had 3 out of 5 already quitting due to the hardship and the last 2 were quitting before the target time because they were both losing too much weight and did not want to make themselves ill.
Remember that men are considered the most intelligent species on earth. Men killng men is normal. Women serve a more important purpose for men so there is no reason to kill them. An intelligent decision based on value
