| icarus3.com :: Forums :: General - PLEASE NOTE: YOU MUST FIRST SIGNUP TO POST :: Ask a Question |
|
<< Previous thread | Next thread >> |
| Questions about your philosophy | ||
|
Moderators: icarus
|
| Author | Post | ||
| Philosophy Guru |
| ||
| Guest | You wrote: "So freedom is the origin of all values. To commit to anything necessarily entails committing to freedom". Would you say freedom is therefore of objective value since it is because of freedom that all other values are possible? Presumably, if you did concede that freedom was of objective value (even instrumental value), that would lead to problems in your theory. You also wrote: "In order to be truly happy, you have to accept that you are alone, free, and thus inevitably responsible for yourself in this meaningless world." Why be truly happy according to your philosophy? (indeed, why be coherent at all?) Anyway, I'm glad that your theory does not preclude being truly happy - from a subjective viewpoint, you would have to be a nut to think that happiness was less or equally desirable than unhappiness. So it's good to know that, whatever your philosophy, you think that an agent can live and die a happy life! As Rabelais said, 'le rire est le propre de l'homme'! Laughter and happiness are intrinsic to humandhood! I'll drink to that! You introduce the notion of responsibility, which is closely tied to the notion of duty. From your writing, it feels like you suggest a rational agent has a duty to himself/herself X, Y, Z. How can you reconcile your strong belief in responsibility and duty to oneself with the belief that nothing really matters? Surely, if you have a duty to do X [i], if cannot be meaningless whether or not you do X? I look forward to your replies! Philosophy Guru | ||
| Back to top | | ||
Powered by e107 Forum System