Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 63
  1. #1 The Imposition of Retroactive Moral Views on Historical Figures. 
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Jefferson and Washington, while visionary for their time, were also slave owners so I will take their concepts of liberty and place it in the context of their time as well.

    Deal?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Sonnabend
    Guest
    Aren't you the same guy who wants people banned for posting points of view you don't like?
    No. And I defy you to prove otherwise.

    Aka, no political writings I disagree with in the libraries. Only freedom books about liberty.
    It must HURT to be this stupid. Reasonable limits with censorship = kiddie porn and other vile filth of the same ilk.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Jefferson and Washington, while visionary for their time, were also slave owners so I will take their concepts of liberty and place it in the context of their time as well.

    Deal?
    No. People in various eras, including our own, have held to ideas or cultural legacies in one part of their lives while simultaneously developing and supporting ideas that are unbound to cultural or period limitations. A good idea is a good idea and the best ideas appeal across time and history.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Jefferson and Washington, while visionary for their time, were also slave owners so I will take their concepts of liberty and place it in the context of their time as well.

    Deal?


    um...ya....but much better than Rousseau, Marx or our current brand of intellectuals concepts.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    No. People in various eras, including our own, have held to ideas or cultural legacies in one part of their lives while simultaneously developing and supporting ideas that are unbound to cultural or period limitations. A good idea is a good idea and the best ideas appeal across time and history.
    Then we get to pick and choose what we believe their ideals represent as opposed to what they actually meant?

    Convenient.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    Then we get to pick and choose what we believe their ideals represent as opposed to what they actually meant?

    Convenient.
    In this case, he told us what he actually meant. We are not discussing a 3,000 years dead quasi-mythical figure from history. We don't have to rely on secondary or tertiary sources, we have no language barrier, the historical record is complete, the author's words haven't been redacted by conquerors or fanatics, and the cultural context has not been interrupted by war, oppression, disasters, or time. He was a fairly clear and concise writer for the time so I don't see what your own difficulty is in determining his positions on government or liberty.

    You may disagree with those positions but I don't see how you could claim they are duplicitous or enigmatic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member Arroyo_Doble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ft Worth
    Posts
    3,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    In this case, he told us what he actually meant. We are not discussing a 3,000 years dead quasi-mythical figure from history. We don't have to rely on secondary or tertiary sources, we have no language barrier, the historical record is complete, the author's words haven't been redacted by conquerors or fanatics, and the cultural context has not been interrupted by war, oppression, disasters, or time. He was a fairly clear and concise writer for the time so I don't see what your own difficulty is in determining his positions on government or liberty.

    You may disagree with those positions but I don't see how you could claim they are duplicitous or enigmatic.
    The slavery thing make them so (and other issues as well ... we will probably hit those if you don't get bored). You just want to sweep that under the rug. You want to take the naked language and place it in a modern world and tell us what they meant is crystal clear. I disagree. They are not crystal clear and you are simply trying to find some Founder imprimatur for your wholly contemporary philosophy on government and liberty.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    No. People in various eras, including our own, have held to ideas or cultural legacies in one part of their lives while simultaneously developing and supporting ideas that are unbound to cultural or period limitations. A good idea is a good idea and the best ideas appeal across time and history.
    So why doesn't that idea appeal to the time period in which it was formulated?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    So why doesn't that idea appeal to the time period in which it was formulated?
    Pretty obviously it did.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Arroyo_Doble View Post
    The slavery thing make them so (and other issues as well ... we will probably hit those if you don't get bored). You just want to sweep that under the rug. You want to take the naked language and place it in a modern world and tell us what they meant is crystal clear. I disagree. They are not crystal clear and you are simply trying to find some Founder imprimatur for your wholly contemporary philosophy on government and liberty.
    This a thousand times.

    this is all we ever get with Founding Father Worship along with literalism and original-ism. naked quotes brought into a different area with a different reality to justify a contemporary (and some might argue manufactured by neoconservatives) governmebt philosophy.

    the slavery issue is one glaring issue, but with changes of technology, population size, information, cultural changes, and the development of the est of the world, we get innumeral problems.


    This is the exact same behavior we get from people who believe the Bible is a history book / science text book and refuse to acknowledge the vastly different social, philosophical, cultural, economic, scientific, and politicalin which it was written, which leads to the most vapid childish opinions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •