[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

In regards to the social creature talk - We are social creatures (an isolated homo sapien sapein will go insane, family groups are the basis of tribes etc etc), and forming groups makes the hardships of life easier (it is easier for 2 people to pick up 5 sticks than 1 person to pick up 5 sticks).

Isn't this the principle behind why government is necessary (or at least helpful)? If our natural state is poverty, why not use collective power to progress past that?

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

I was pulling from Rose Wilder Lane.



Paine talks about the life of the Indian being a continuous holiday compared to the European poor... even though the European poor has "more". (Agrarian Justice)

*I'm saying man's natural state isn't to have an abundance. Poverty isn't bad.*

In regards to the social creature talk - We are social creatures (an isolated homo sapien sapein will go insane, family groups are the basis of tribes etc etc), and forming groups makes the hardships of life easier (it is easier for 2 people to pick up 5 sticks than 1 person to pick up 5 sticks).

It is interesting that the Left rejects deities yet, it relies entirely on some material omnipotent entity to meet its ends. In fact it thrives off that entity. The omnipotent entity must distribute equality as a moral good. So on and so forth. The Right fully embraces a metaphysical omnipotent entity that must distribute inequality as a moral good.

[TheSilentAssassin]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

It is interesting that the Left rejects deities yet, it relies entirely on some material omnipotent entity to meet its ends. In fact it thrives off that entity. The omnipotent entity must distribute equality as a moral good. So on and so forth. The Right fully embraces a metaphysical omnipotent entity that must distribute inequality as a moral good.

I wouldn't say the left rejects a metaphysical deity. The "God Gap" is growing but 77% of democrats say they have never doubted the existence of a God. http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/...h-obama-years/

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

it relies entirely on some material omnipotent entity to meet its ends. In fact it thrives off that entity. The omnipotent entity must distribute equality as a moral good. So on and so forth. The Right fully embraces a metaphysical omnipotent entity that must distribute inequality as a moral good.

Edit: just elaborate before I post a response

[barrel roll]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

Isn't this the principle behind why government is necessary (or at least helpful)? If our natural state is poverty, why not use collective power to progress past that?

A rising tide raises all ships? Sure. I'm down. I think the majority of the US of A's problems are because of scale.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

It is interesting that the Left rejects deities yet, it relies entirely on some material omnipotent entity to meet its ends. In fact it thrives off that entity. The omnipotent entity must distribute equality as a moral good. So on and so forth. The Right fully embraces a metaphysical omnipotent entity that must distribute inequality as a moral good.

I swear, I was just listening to a guy talk about that this past weekend; how the "left" is all about egalitarianism while the "right" is about prosperity through freedom and how those things were polar opposites.

He also talked about how the "right" does nothing but kowtow to the "left", and the "left" never compromises. eg - r says big gov bad, shrink gov. l says big gov good, expand gov. r in compromise says ok... expand gov, but not as much as your originally wanted.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by barrel roll

A rising tide raises all ships? Sure. I'm down. I think the majority of the US of A's problems are because of scale.




I swear, I was just listening to a guy talk about that this past weekend; how the "left" is all about egalitarianism while the "right" is about prosperity through freedom and how those things were polar opposites.

He also talked about how the "right" does nothing but kowtow to the "left", and the "left" never compromises. eg - r says big gov bad, shrink gov. l says big gov good, expand gov. r in compromise says ok... expand gov, but not as much as your originally wanted.

The right is afraid to admit it, but fundamentally every right wing movement and philosophy proceeds from the idea that inequality is a moral good, in fact, existence is predicated on it. This is the true division between left and right. I think scope of government, social policy etc. all flow from either pretext.

I'm not comfortable with defining the right as being for prosperity through freedom. Can you please give me a context for freedom?

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin

I wouldn't say the left rejects a metaphysical deity. The "God Gap" is growing but 77% of democrats say they have never doubted the existence of a God. http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/...h-obama-years/



Edit: just elaborate before I post a response

I think the Left proceeds from a physicalist perspective. Even the God which a leftist claims to believe in is anthropomorphic.


I'll be happy to clarify, just let me know where you're needing it.

[Umami]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

It is interesting that the Left rejects deities yet, it relies entirely on some material omnipotent entity to meet its ends. In fact it thrives off that entity. The omnipotent entity must distribute equality as a moral good. So on and so forth. The Right fully embraces a metaphysical omnipotent entity that must distribute inequality as a moral good.

This feels like a very sloppy statement to make. You haven't done a very good job of distinguishing what you mean by a "material" omnipotent entity. Also, you have not defined equality. If you're talking about within our current social and cultural constructs, then that is a very narrow definition of equality.

Finally, I'm not sure omnipotence is required by anything you're talking about. All you have to do is recognize that governments and indeed all social hierarchies are constructs of man, subject to man's fallibility as well as man's control.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

I think the Left proceeds from a physicalist perspective. Even the God which a leftist claims to believe in is anthropomorphic.

I'm going to need some clarification on this one.

[Iamamartianchurch]

A material omnipotent entity can be the state or government. It doesn't have to be omnipotent in the purest sense of the word, only perceived as such. The reason I say it is material is because it is a construct of man, its existence does not transcend man.

The left whether it denies or embraces a God or Gods views it or them as a being. Most importantly, as an individual, like a man sees himself.

I think literally any definition of equality will work so long as a particular instance of equality is desired.

[Umami]

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

A material omnipotent entity can be the state or government. It doesn't have to be omnipotent in the purest sense of the word, only perceived as such.

Neither of those things are remotely omnipotent, and I disagree that the majority of people in any political group see them as such.

Originally Posted by Iamamartianchurch

I think literally any definition of equality will work so long as a particular instance of equality is desired.

I suppose rather than a definition, I was looking for context. Equality can only be studied within specific frameworks, be they economic, political, religious etc. I doubt anyone would argue for equality within all frameworks.

[Iamamartianchurch]

Originally Posted by Umami

Neither of those things are remotely omnipotent, and I disagree that the majority of people in any political group see them as such.



I suppose rather than a definition, I was looking for context. Equality can only be studied within specific frameworks, be they economic, political, religious etc. I doubt anyone would argue for equality within all frameworks.

I'll need some time to flesh out my thoughts on this.

EDIT: Got it. The state is treated as a transcendent entity which has the power ( omnipotence) to enact a moral good. The role of God - and subsequently the spiritual caste - was supplanted with the state. The fundamental outlook which can be called nothing less than religious, has not been altered.

Well, any context will do. Equality in X. Though I think it is somewhat a slippery slope. For example, Start with political equality, given enough time you may end up with attempts at income equality.