cybercoma Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 As any of you who have read or studied Machiavelli know, he believed that peace was more important than personal liberty or freedom. If you could only have one or the other, which would you choose? A society with peace, but no freedom, or a society with complete freedom, but embroiled in chaos? I'm curious to see which people would pick when made to choose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 I have peace but no peace of mind. I would choose liberty - at least I could be in the "persuit of happiness" ...which is more interesting than happiness which is peace. Must be the melancoly Russian soul. And Machnivelli was a cut throat opportunist and a lieing rat...what would you study that crimminal for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 Liberty for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 What does it mean to have liberty but not peace ? What's an example of that Iraq today ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 I would choose peace in the fullest sense of the word. Any society that has to suppress individual freedom to achieve peace will lose both. Liberty follows peace, not the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 I would choose peace in the fullest sense of the word. Any society that has to suppress individual freedom to achieve peace will lose both.Liberty follows peace, not the other way around. In order to have freedom you must first make friends and achieve peace - then with mutual love and co-operation freedom is granted on and other - respect. So you are correct peace first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 27, 2008 Report Share Posted November 27, 2008 (edited) Its a choice that's too difficult to make, because so much that is unwanted can come with either choice. Peace without freedowm is utterly useless. Freedom without peace is just as useless. Edited November 28, 2008 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Its a choice that's too difficult to make, because so much that is unwanted can come with either choice. Peace without freedowm is utterly useless. Freedom without peace is just as useless. How so? ...there is much freedom without peace at this very moment. The choice is easy...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 How so? ...there is much freedom without peace at this very moment. The choice is easy...... There cannot be peace without freedom, nor freedom with out peace. They must co-exist to be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 How so? ...there is much freedom without peace at this very moment. And that freedom would be much better with peace. I don't think you can even argue against that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted November 28, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Obviously the best choice is peace AND liberty. That's the goal for any society; however, it has been argued that you cannot have peace with free liberties, nor could you have free liberty and maintain peace. The curiosity is in what people would choose if they were faced with a choice of one of these two societies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Obviously the best choice is peace AND liberty. That's the goal for any society; however, it has been argued that you cannot have peace with free liberties, nor could you have free liberty and maintain peace. The curiosity is in what people would choose if they were faced with a choice of one of these two societies. It is an unreasonable choice and not worth debating. As I said one cannot exist without the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 It is an unreasonable choice and not worth debating. As I said one cannot exist without the other. That's the second time I've agreed with you in a week. Scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 And that freedom would be much better with peace. I don't think you can even argue against that. Nope....can't argue with that. But the question as posed is rather straightforward....and easily answered. Just an observation: there is 100% peace in death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 (edited) There cannot be peace without freedom, nor freedom with out peace. They must co-exist to be true. Not true....liberty exists today in many places, without peace. Peace is way overrated. Edited November 28, 2008 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Nope....can't argue with that. But the question as posed is rather straightforward....and easily answered.Just an observation: there is 100% peace in death. Liberty could exist in complete anarchy. Its not as easy a choice as it may seem, at least for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Liberty could exist in complete anarchy. Its not as easy a choice as it may seem, at least for me. OK...but we are not talking about the extremes of a limit theorem here. For all practical purposes, the answer to the question is demonstrated every day. Those who wish to twist in the wind will never be satisfied with an answer because of self imposed qualifications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 OK...but we are not talking about the extremes of a limit theorem here. What we are deciding on has no condition except the stated one. The liberty or peace could come with anything else and we have no choice in the matter. It is a difficult decision and one that I wouldn't be able to make without more information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 What we are deciding on has no condition except the stated one. The liberty or peace could come with anything else and we have no choice in the matter. It is a difficult decision and one that I wouldn't be able to make without more information. See....that's what I mean. I am empowered to make the decision for myself without such fears. I have liberty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 (edited) See....that's what I mean. I am empowered to make the decision for myself without such fears. I have liberty. They have liberty in Somalia too. Also, I really don't like to make quick decisions. Edited November 28, 2008 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 They have liberty in Somalia too. Right...liberty can exist without peace.....and often does so. Peace is overrated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Right...liberty can exist without peace.....and often does so. Peace is overrated. I don't want to live in Somalia. Without some element of peace, I would say that liberty is almost useless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 I don't want to live in Somalia. Without some element of peace, I would say that liberty is almost useless. More qualifications.....yet liberty lives and thrives even in those conditions...like a weed. People who insist on peace would never plant the seeds of liberty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 People who insist on peace would never plant the seeds of liberty. Not complete liberty, no, but complete liberty may not even work. We really don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 Not complete liberty, no, but complete liberty may not even work. We really don't know. Far better to have partial liberty instead of waiting for a complete peace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.