What kind of person are you?

gworld · #1 (**permalink**) 04-18-2005, 06:19 PM

Lately I have been thinking about what kind of society are we and where do we stand on the matter of principales. Surely we all give lip service to democracy, truth, honour ... but when it comes to action, are we ready to back up the words with action, even if it is going to cost us?

May be this poll at least show us a small sample of society in general. Vote truthfully, after all nobody knows how you have voted.

ADAM Web Design · #2 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 01:27 PM

What happens if one of the principles in your life is to do what's best for you first?

**crankydave** · #3 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 01:54 PM

There is only one correct answer. This goes back to one of my psych classes. Behavior, predictability, and freedom of choice or more accurately, lack thereof.

When faced with more than one option, a person will always do what they perceive to be in their best interest at that given time. This is a given, no matter what their "best interest" is. Since this is a given, it's never a matter of freedom of choice.

Dave

gworld · #4 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankydave

There is only one correct answer. This goes back to one of my psych classes. Behavior, predictability, and freedom of choice or more accurately, lack thereof.

When faced with more than one option, a person will always do what they perceive to be in their best interest at that given time. This is a given, no matter what their "best interest" is. Since this is a given, it's never a matter of freedom of choice.

Dave

What you are trying to say, is the ideas that the German philosopher has discussed in The Phenomenology of Spirit or Mind and The Science of Logic.

The basic idea is that every time we face different choices, the only reason that we have a freedom of choice is because we do not have full information about the results of our choices and in this case freedom of choice is nothing more than orbitary actions.
He also reasons that if we had full infromation about the result of our choices, the freedom of choice will disappear and we always chose what is most beneficial to us.
This is the bases of his explanation on how the real freedom and determinism or lack of choice will emerge.

But he also discusses based on Rosso ideas, different action which are considered virtue or vice.

While virtue is considered the correct action and in long term beneficial to the good of individual and the society, in a short term can cause harm to a short term interest of a person.

for example while fighting for democratic principales or telling a truth is a virtue; in a short term can cause your web site not be listed or you lose a promotion at your job.

The poll is to determine how every one reacts to such situations. Will a person take the path of virtue or choose the vice (selfishness) and short term interest.

**crankydave** · #5 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gworld

What you are trying to say, is the ideas that the German philosopher has discussed in The Phenomenology of Spirit or Mind and The Science of Logic.

No I wasn't. I was speaking of the ideas of Baruch Spinosa in the last of his Ethics books.

Dave

**ctabuk** · #6 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 04:56 PM

I intended to stay out of this thread, and I had hoped that the rest of you would not rise to the bait.
I rest my case, but one last word, everyone who knows me in WPW knows that I have never ever said a bad word about anyone, it is simply not my style, I rely upon my instincts, and my insticts tell me just one thing, if you love WPW as much as I do, resist from replying, do the right thing. Some people (and I am not naming names) have nothing better to do than to attempt to castigate people with superior intellect confirming their very sorry egos. The End

gworld · #7 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankydave

Quote:

Originally Posted by gworld

What you are trying to say, is the ideas that the German philosopher has discussed in The Phenomenology of Spirit or Mind and The Science of Logic.

No I wasn't. I was speaking of the ideas of Baruch Spinosa in the last of his Ethics books.

Dave

I can understand, how this mistake can happen. After all according to Hegel's class room lectures, you can not be philosopher, if you are not follower of Spinoza first.
He was may be the only pre-Hegel philosopher who understood the dialectic but it was Hegel who draw the ultimate conclusion of this line of reasoning as Marx mentions later on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ctabuk

Some people (and I am not naming names) have nothing better to do than to attempt to castigate people with superior intellect confirming their very sorry egos. The End

I really do not understand what you mean by this line but if you are accusing me of crime of having superior intellect, I would like to thank you and I am glad that you find having an inferior intellect so comforting.

**crankydave** · #8 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gworld

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankydave

Quote:

Originally Posted by gworld

What you are trying to say, is the ideas that the German philosopher has discussed in The Phenomenology of Spirit or Mind and The Science of Logic.

No I wasn't. I was speaking of the ideas of Baruch Spinosa in the last of his Ethics books.

Dave

I can understand, how this mistake can happen. After all according to Hegel's class room lectures, you can not be philosopher, if you are not follower of Spinoza first.
He was may be the only pre-Hegel philosopher who understood the dialectic but it was Hegel who draw the ultimate conclusion of this line of reasoning as Marx mentions later on.

The first mistake was mine for replying to your question.

The second mistake was yours for assuming I am unable to draw my own ultimate conclusions based upon the writings and ideas of Spinosa.

I will not make the first mistake again.

Dave

gworld · #9 (**permalink**) 04-20-2005, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crankydave

The second mistake was yours for assuming I am unable to draw my own ultimate conclusions based upon the writings and ideas of Spinoza.

Dave

I did not assume that you can not make your own ultimate conclusions, in fact I am glad that you do, I admire a man who can think for himself.

I was just trying to give a point of reference to the same arguments and discussions but in more complex and orderly form in the history of philosophy.

I do not know about you, but I am humble person who is always ready to listen to different arguments, especially from such ginats of 20th century philosophy such as Hegel before making up my mind.

I think the discussion about Freedom and determinism is very interesting subject that I would like to discuss but if you wish not to do so, I will respect that.

Best of luck how ever you decide and have a good day.