Philosophy Now Forum

Devalued Values
For a value to be meaningful it must operate positively and negatively within the system.
Such a value as Freedom can be abused by making it appear that anything we do is a product of choice and Freedom. But we then get to an outcome that applies it to everything conceivable. A society and world in which people are entirely free, would in fact either be in a condition of Chaos, Anarchism, Servility, or Altruism. If we all choose to act contrary to each other there is chaos. In autonomy we have anarchism. In obedience is tyranny. In mutual benefit is altruism. As generalised descriptions. Freedom is only a useful value if it stands opposed to its antonym, within the system, of the servile society. Similarly equality or duty may be employed in isolation, and thereby make nonsense of ethics. It may be deduced perhaps that the perfect servile society is a manner of 'theocracy' in which authority is enshrined in the idea of 'god' and humanity exists to serve this idea, rather than each other or themselves. Altruism is different to anarchism, in acting through the community at various levels.

RWStanding wrote: A society and world in which people are entirely free, would in fact either be in a condition of Chaos, Anarchism, Servility, or Altruism.

You can't have total freedom in any society, otherwise it wouldn't be a society. A society is a functioning entity with laws, rules and conventions, the freedom you have within it comes with the provision that you behave within the constraints of these things. The amount and quality of freedom in any society is dependant on the nature of its rules and how rigorously they are enforced.

perhaps that the perfect servile society is a manner of 'theocracy' in which authority is enshrined in the idea of 'god' and humanity exists to serve this idea,

Are you advocating or condemning a "servile society"? In fact, I'm not sure at all what point you are trying to make with this post.

I'm completely free, the rest are completely free, we use violence to take control when we want, but our violence doesn't stop people from choosing their own choices.

RWStanding wrote:For a value to be meaningful it must operate positively and negatively within the system.

Your first premise seems obviously incorrect to me. You'd need to argue for this (and for my views, you'd have to make the argument about something other than meaning, because there's no way that you'd be able to successfully argue what you want to argue specifically (or literally, I suppose) about meaning).

Such a value as Freedom

I wouldn't say that freedom (or anything like that) "is a value." Rather, one can value or not value freedom, and to varying degrees.

. . . As generalised descriptions. Freedom is only a useful value if it stands opposed to its antonym, within the system, of the servile society.

I agree that the concept of freedom only makes sense relative to a lack of freedom, and that both need to obtain in this case in different respects. "Absolute freedom" doesn't really make any sense.