Interesting Dilemna?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Interesting Dilemna?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Interesting Dilemna?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Interesting Dilemna? - 6/4/2014 10:12:52 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

On another thread, entitled: "PBM, Which Is More Important... ", a poster posted this:

quote:

Values or laws?

It provoked some thought for me and I think it might for others.

My take on it is that if we truly had values that we could all agree upon, laws would be almost redundant (and unnecessary).

Ideas?

Screen captures still RULE Ya feel me?

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 5:26:22 AM

mnottertail

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

I believe that is a tautology. And it is dilemma. A bifuricated proposition, or alternative hard choices.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 9:31:37 AM

Spiritedsub2

Posts: 3316
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

On another thread, entitled: "PBM, Which Is More Important... ", a poster posted this:

quote:

Values or laws?

It provoked some thought for me and I think it might for others.

My take on it is that if we truly had values that we could all agree upon, laws would be almost redundant (and unnecessary).

Ideas?

Screen captures still RULE Ya feel me?

We'll never have values we all agree on. Ideas of "justice" and "fairness" are in the eye of the beholder.

_____________________________

Don’t grieve. Anything you lose comes round in another form.
~ Rumi

Laughing Dolphin

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 10:20:07 AM

angelikaJ

Posts: 8641
Joined: 6/22/2007
Status: offline

I think that the majority of people who follow Judea-Christian principals tend to think of themselves as believing in the 10 commandments, and yet, are unable to follow them perfectly.

_____________________________

The original home of the caffeinated psychotic hair pixies.
(as deemed by He who owns me)

http://www.collarchat.com/m_3234821/tm.htm

30 fluffy points!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQjuCQd01sg

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 11:27:10 AM

DarkSteven

Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline

Laws in fact ARE values. Values that have been voted on, and written in stone. The values of society.

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to angelikaJ)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 12:22:16 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

I think, if we equate "values" with "morals" (which I think is the case), one cannot legislate morality. You can't write a law to change what's in someone's heart and mind (though, good Lord knows; our government tries).

Taking your answer, specifically; we don't vote on all laws. I'm sure, if you tried, really hard, you could find some people that have moral objections to existing laws which were NOT voted on.

Screen captures still RULE! Ya feel me?

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 12:43:09 PM

Spiritedsub2

Posts: 3316
Joined: 7/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Laws in fact ARE values. Values that have been voted on, and written in stone. The values of society.

Only the values of a majority, not of all. Or of a minority with clout.

_____________________________

Don’t grieve. Anything you lose comes round in another form.
~ Rumi

Laughing Dolphin

(in reply to DarkSteven)

Profile

Post #: 7

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 1:45:47 PM

kdsub

Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline

quote:

My take on it is that if we truly had values that we could all agree upon, laws would be almost redundant (and unnecessary).

Ideas?

I don't think that would be true...Just because someone understands or knows right from wrong or the meaning of a value does not mean they will follow them. To have an orderly society where the breaking from values requires a punishment then laws would be necessary for a consistent judgement.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 6/5/2014 1:47:01 PM >

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 8

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 4:15:50 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

On another thread, entitled: "PBM, Which Is More Important... ", a poster posted this:

quote:

Values or laws?

It provoked some thought for me and I think it might for others.

My take on it is that if we truly had values that we could all agree upon, laws would be almost redundant (and unnecessary).

Ideas?

Screen captures still RULE Ya feel me?

Sometimes our own personal values come into conflict -- a true dilemma.

So we'd also have to have all the relative scale, and we'd have to agree that the good of all is better than individual interests.

Gosh -- that sounds like communism!

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 9

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/5/2014 6:15:56 PM

PeonForHer

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

Whoa, you're becoming an anarchist, DS!

On William Godwin:

"Godwin is generally regarded as the founder of the school of thought known as 'philosophical anarchism'. He argued in Political Justice (1793)[72][74] that government has an inherently malevolent influence on society, and that it perpetuates dependency and ignorance. He thought that the spread of the use of reason to the masses would eventually cause government to wither away as an unnecessary force. Although he did not accord the state with moral legitimacy, he was against the use of revolutionary tactics for removing the government from power. Rather, he advocated for its replacement through a process of peaceful evolution.[72][75]

His aversion to the imposition of a rules-based society led him to denounce, as a manifestation of the people’s ‘mental enslavement’, the foundations of law, property rights and even the institution of marriage. He considered the basic foundations of society as constraining the natural development of individuals to use their powers of reasoning to arrive at a mutually beneficial method of social organisation. In each case, government and its institutions are shown to constrain the development of our capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of private judgment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 10

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/8/2014 3:38:16 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

Laws are the by-product of values. Most laws successfully obeyed are those enacted by govt. formed by a plebiscite of the people, reflecting what civil society values...through compromise.

(in reply to PeonForHer)

Profile

Post #: 11

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/8/2014 3:51:16 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Whoa, you're becoming an anarchist, DS!

On William Godwin:

"Godwin is generally regarded as the founder of the school of thought known as 'philosophical anarchism'. He argued in Political Justice (1793)[72][74] that government has an inherently malevolent influence on society, and that it perpetuates dependency and ignorance. He thought that the spread of the use of reason to the masses would eventually cause government to wither away as an unnecessary force. Although he did not accord the state with moral legitimacy, he was against the use of revolutionary tactics for removing the government from power. Rather, he advocated for its replacement through a process of peaceful evolution.[72][75]

His aversion to the imposition of a rules-based society led him to denounce, as a manifestation of the people’s ‘mental enslavement’, the foundations of law, property rights and even the institution of marriage. He considered the basic foundations of society as constraining the natural development of individuals to use their powers of reasoning to arrive at a mutually beneficial method of social organisation. In each case, government and its institutions are shown to constrain the development of our capacity to live wholly in accordance with the full and free exercise of private judgment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

Yes but where I disagree with Godwin is that a society could have laws without private property which I feel came about by greed...same as money. Marriage similar, which I feel came about through the insecurity of possessiveness all of which from the sin of pride and was to be spiritual...not legal. The contractual of private property or money with the exception of personal trinkets thus...rendered of little consequence.

(in reply to PeonForHer)

Profile

Post #: 12

RE: Interesting Dilemna? - 6/8/2014 3:15:39 PM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

Or you can look at government in a lowest common denominator view. A government is the bandits you pay to keep the other bandits away. When the bandits become too greedy; it is time to shoot the bandits and get another batch.

Any time an organization becomes large enough; it tends to behave like a life form. Usually like a slime mold. It only exists to accrete more to itself and tries to get into everything. You see more and more laws to criminalize more and more actions until you get an Orwellian ideal where everything that is not mandatory is forbidden. Failure to prune government in a timely manner leads to totalitarian control. Now, totalitarian control may be benign on the conforming but it is still well regulated slavery to anyone outside of the center of the bell curve.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 13