h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<...why should we go for the maximum amount of freedom for the maximum number? That sounds very unfair on minority groups.>

When you're trying to satisfy everyone, as much as you can, isn't it a bit inevitable that minority groups will be less well served?

I agree with you, Otto, that people generally *do* want the same things. We would be incapable of social living otherwise.

I started this thread because I believe that we concentrate far too heavily on what we can get from society, and forget/neglect what we must do in return. But that's a matter of balance. Our societies have worked for thousands of years, and continue to do so....

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

sorry I thought this was a proper respectful discussion
since when is calling a view strange an argument?

That seems a little unfair, Leo, as Otto did give - in the sentence immediately following his opinion that your view is strange - his reason for thinking so: "People can and do work together - otherwise there couldn't be societies." It looks like quite a strong argument to me.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Think they call that "ad hominem"...picked that up the other day from another hootooer. Means attacking the person not the idea. Great argument decoy tactic.

Working together in groups is such second nature that we don't even think to take account of it in formulating our political/economic doctrines. In fact, no advanced society would survive five minutes of individualistic all against all economic competition.

Noggin

Well someone should tell the government 'cause they are postmodern obsessed. I agree. But why the heck is everyone seeking self promotion and behaving like fascists?

Now, now, let's not forget that the Nazi party were left-wing fascists.

Well i thought all fascists, by definition, were right wing.
Where am I wrong?

Apologies to Leo if I caused any offence - none was intended.

But what I said wasn't an ad hominem. What I said was:

"This seems to me to be a very strange view which - if I may say so -isn't backed up by the facts."

And I then proceeded to outline what the facts are, and put forward an argument (and it was an argument because it had premises and a conclusion) for a contrary view. My argument was that the proposition that people can't work together is false, and brought forward examples of people working together to serve as counterexamples.

It's not an ad hominem because it doesn't mention or refer to Leo - merely to the view put forward, which I still think is a strange one for the reasons that I outlined. If anyone would like to convince me otherwise, I'm all ears.

Otto

Check out the original aims of the Nazi party, in particular their volksgemeinsschaft - the idea of a free community for the equally racially pure. Gotta go now, or I'd explain more. Night all.

Okay, I will.