Philosophy Now Forum

or maybe they just dont like being bombed

http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-content ... DRONES.pdf

freedom is a matter of perspective. What is freedom for one person is slavery, bondage or prohibition for another person.

For instance, for me it is a freedom to walk into a café and not have to breath the toxic fumes of cigarettes, however, popularly, the prohibition of smoking inside cafés is not termed a freedom. But practically, though not always; not having the prohibition would render me in a lack of a freedom... so is it a freedom or not? Can society make a choice on the matter? I guess the final answer is that whatever the society or the state calls it, it will be termed thus, removing the notion of objective truth and instead populist opinion.

The Voice of Time wrote:freedom is a matter of perspective. What is freedom for one person is slavery, bondage or prohibition for another person.

For instance, for me it is a freedom to walk into a café and not have to breath the toxic fumes of cigarettes, however, popularly, the prohibition of smoking inside cafés is not termed a freedom. But practically, though not always; not having the prohibition would render me in a lack of a freedom... so is it a freedom or not? Can society make a choice on the matter? I guess the final answer is that whatever the society or the state calls it, it will be termed thus, removing the notion of objective truth and instead populist opinion.

A rather paltry and insensitive response given the text that Kayla posted.
So what you are saying is that the right to smoke fags is like the right not to get bombed by drones and live with the fear of getting bombed by drones?

When ever a person says 'they', you can be sure that very often 'they' are an ill-defined grouping designed to justify atrocities

The reply dealt with freedom in general. Including all forms. The conclusion would in this situation most likely apply as that if the vast majority of people meant that they gave freedom to the Afghans then that would be the official definition of the situation... Operation Enduring Freedom. Whereas others would claim otherwise, and also vice versa, where the Operation is condemned as not providing freedom.

I also think that the freedom to live is very much a freedom. The situations are very much different but are both here covered by the same category.

The Voice of Time wrote:The reply dealt with freedom in general. Including all forms. The conclusion would in this situation most likely apply as that if the vast majority of people meant that they gave freedom to the Afghans then that would be the official definition of the situation... Operation Enduring Freedom. Whereas others would claim otherwise, and also vice versa, where the Operation is condemned as not providing freedom.

I also think that the freedom to live is very much a freedom. The situations are very much different but are both here covered by the same category.

Sorry I cannot really comment on the above except to say that it is not very clear, especially the sentence beginning "The conclusion would ...."
The linked article is not related to 'freedom to Afghans' as it is about Drones attacks on Pakistan, and the rest of your post is obscure to say the least. This, also has very little to so with 'smoking in cafes' - the only thing smoking is the homes of ordinary people, and wedding parties.

chaz wyman wrote:Sorry I cannot really comment on the above except to say that it is not very clear, especially the sentence beginning "The conclusion would ...."
The linked article is not related to 'freedom to Afghans' as it is about Drones attacks on Pakistan, and the rest of your post is obscure to say the least. This, also has very little to so with 'smoking in cafes' - the only think smoking it the homes of ordinary people, and wedding parties.

Stop being so damned grumpy for f***s sake. There's nothing wrong with me giving a little off-shoot comment on freedom in general when it is mentioned in a thread, and I don't have to elaborate long and wide for you to comprehend how I put 1 and 1 together to reason my way to the reply I made, my "obscure" statement trying to help you on the way to comprehension.

The Voice of Time wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:Sorry I cannot really comment on the above except to say that it is not very clear, especially the sentence beginning "The conclusion would ...."
The linked article is not related to 'freedom to Afghans' as it is about Drones attacks on Pakistan, and the rest of your post is obscure to say the least. This, also has very little to so with 'smoking in cafes' - the only thing smoking are the homes of ordinary people, and wedding parties.

Stop being so damned grumpy for f***s sake. There's nothing wrong with me giving a little off-shoot comment on freedom in general when it is mentioned in a thread, and I don't have to elaborate long and wide for you to comprehend how I put 1 and 1 together to reason my way to the reply I made, my "obscure" statement trying to help you on the way to comprehension.

Maybe you should cool down, leave it for a day, then try to unpack your posting from its confused assumptions and leaps of meaning?
When I said it was 'unclear' that does not mean I am stupid, it means you have not conveyed your meaning effectively.

Your posting was a one line platitude followed by a single example 'smoking in cafes'. Hardly meaningful,
Your follow up was particularly sweeping - and basically without meaning.

maybe this will clarify my meaning

http://www.lostrepublic.us/Graphics/The ... mbThem.jpg

Kayla wrote:maybe this will clarify my meaning

http://www.lostrepublic.us/Graphics/The ... mbThem.jpg

Thanks for supplying the version for the hard-of-thinking. Your first link makes your point very well.