Toyolad:
the government don't order you in most cases, they only place restrictions on you to curb your excesses for the sake of the common good

Using “most cases", implies their are other cases they do, in which this restrictions atimes will hamper what would have yield a positive outcome for you in the state of nature? Lockean..

Waiting.... .

Fynestboi:



I am of the opinion that Lockean state of nature is better of than a new society, but hobbesian state of nature is not..

However, I won't but point out man's extreme way of using our rationality due to the absent of “check and balance" Man is naturally egoistic, and as such allowing man to remain in Lockean state of nature, will still amount to violence.


What you think sir?

Remember when Locke talked of "Tabular Rasa"? He said when WE give birth to a new child, his mind or consciousness is empty and clean, so any knowledge or traits that he will develop with is as a result of what he has been taught or experiencing.
From the above sir, it is obvious that if man decides to live without GOVERNMENT, he will learn the dispensation of a central authority as he grows thereby making him accustomed to it.
You made mention of Man being naturally egoistic, I agree. Darwin has postulated that man must do anything to survive, so that cannot be changed. My question is, is man's egoism not evident in today society? Has organised GOVERNMENT made man lose his sense of selfishness? If anything, it got worse.

You also speak of the dire and unbearable state of life if GOVERNMENT is absent. I respectfully differ sir. GOVERNMENT is not responsible for order. Reason is. The animal kingdom has shown that.

evening everyone, ade I see you,every other lover of wisdom I hail ooooooo.

am not a philosophy student but I love wisdom and won't mind learning some from this platform. am a student of Oau.

evening everyone, finest I see you,every other lover of wisdom I hail ooooooo.

am not a philosophy student but I love wisdom and won't mind learning some from this platform. am a student of Oau.

I will lay weak bones now my colleagues in reason.... I shall return in due time for further discussion.

ejitnte:
evening everyone, finest I see you,every other lover of wisdom I hail ooooooo.

am not a philosophy student but I love wisdom and won't mind learning some from this platform. am a student of Oau.

Welcome bro.... Your department sir?

Freemanan:


Remember when Locke talked of "Tabular Rasa"? He said when WE give birth to a new child, his mind or consciousness is empty and clean, so any knowledge or traits that he will develop with is as a result of what he has been taught or experiencing.
From the above sir, it is obvious that if man decides to live without GOVERNMENT, he will learn the dispensation of a central authority as he grows thereby making him accustomed to it.

Then this presupposes each family will form their own government, but what happens when my neighbor is becoming stronger than I from the same land we are tilling from?

You made mention of Man being naturally egoistic, I agree. Darwin has postulated that man must do anything to survive, so that cannot be changed. My question is, is man's egoism not evident in today society? Has organised GOVERNMENT made man lose his sense of selfishness? If anything, it got worse.

man egoism is evident, but it's limited with the presence of common wealth. Assuming there is no government, man's egoistic nature will turn the society to “tug of conflict" which government in one way or the other tries to curb.

You also speak of the dire and unbearable state of life if GOVERNMENT is absent. I respectfully differ sir. GOVERNMENT is not responsible for order. Reason is. The animal kingdom has shown that.

Reason is responsible for order but man egoistic nature put reason into negative use, which can only be redirect by the government....
Also sir animal aint rational sir...

Fynestboi:


Welcome bro.... Your department sir?

English

ejitnte:


English

Wow level sir?

Fynestboi:


Wow level sir?

A neophyte.

Fynestboi:



Using “most cases", implies their are other cases they do, in which this restrictions atimes will hamper what would have yield a positive outcome for you in the state of nature? Lockean..

I used 'most cases' cos I don't want to generalize cos I've observed that the government can order your actions in a way.But what is the nature of this order?... they are stated as your duty as a citizen of a particular state, and what is the goal of this duty? its for the promotion of the common good and a show of respect to the state e.g environmental sanitation is for own good, defending the state against external force is for your own good too and so many others.... These restrictions are what make a state organized.

ejitnte:
evening everyone, finest I see you,every other lover of wisdom I hail ooooooo.

am not a philosophy student but I love wisdom and won't mind learning some from this platform. am a student of Oau.

welcome sire

hmmm what a pity that I missed the front page.


I rep philosophy
Kogi State University, Anyigba

promisechild:
hmmm what a pity that I missed the front page.



I rep philosophy

Kogi State University, Anyigba

welcome sire

Freemanan:


Remember when Locke talked of "Tabular Rasa"? He said when WE give birth to a new child, his mind or consciousness is empty and clean, so any knowledge or traits that he will develop with is as a result of what he has been taught or experiencing.
From the above sir, it is obvious that if man decides to live without GOVERNMENT, he will learn the dispensation of a central authority as he grows thereby making him accustomed to it.
You made mention of Man being naturally egoistic, I agree. Darwin has postulated that man must do anything to survive, so that cannot be changed. My question is, is man's egoism not evident in today society? Has organised GOVERNMENT made man lose his sense of selfishness? If anything, it got worse.

You also speak of the dire and unbearable state of life if GOVERNMENT is absent. I respectfully differ sir. GOVERNMENT is not responsible for order. Reason is. The animal kingdom has shown that.

Reason governs the animal kingdom? a kingdom where 'might is right'? where every weak animal lives in fear of predation? where competition for prey among the stronger and faster animals is the order of the day??..hmmm..

I think you're overromanticizing human rationality. our rationality or reasoning abilities as humans differ and so egoism is more evident in some than in others. so the strong takes it all and even at that, the strong ones will also anticipate danger that could be posed by the weak and cunning ones.

A child subscribes to the dictate of his society until he can think independently...thats why we have social reformers ND critiques of societal belief systems

Fynestboi:



Wow level sir?

pls The anti Spam bot has Banned me unjustly sir.pls kindly unban me.Have dome nothing wrong pls

Fynestboi:



I am of the opinion that Lockean state of nature is better of than a new society, but hobbesian state of nature is not..

However, I won't but point out man's extreme way of using our rationality due to the absent of “check and balance" Man is naturally egoistic, and as such allowing man to remain in Lockean state of nature, will still amount to violence.


What you think sir?

I go with you sir on this



Once upon a time in the history of man when there was no government man evil escalated to the apex due to the animal nature in man. This period was chaotic, brutal and lethal. Having experienced the ills in this period called the pre-civil society man tends to enter a social contract with the state by submitting some of his rights to a sovereign authority so that peace might reign in the society and then we have what is now called the civil society.



point of all these is that man has the evil urge in him as a result of self preservation or self pleasure (hedonism) That is why I believe in one of the Yoruba philosophies(Proverb)" the way of animals is the way of human"



without the government the world would have been a world of maximum agony.

Hope I never late sha....

promisechild:
hmmm what a pity that I missed the front page.



I rep philosophy

Kogi State University, Anyigba

Hoping to see you soon bro coz Oau will be calling you guy over from a program soon.

Toyolad:
I used 'most cases' cos I don't want to generalize cos I've observed that the government can order your actions in a way.But what is the nature of this order?... they are stated as your duty as a citizen of a particular state, and what is the goal of this duty? its for the promotion of the common good and a show of respect to the state e.g environmental sanitation is for own good, defending the state against external force is for your own good too and so many others.... These restrictions are what make a state organized.

So you are of the opinion that man cannot do the above without a restriction from an authority?

ejitnte:



A neophyte.

Hope you are enjoying your PHL101...

Philosophy! The foundation of every human discipline (ask the pre-socratics). It's sad and lugubrious that many in the contemporary society are chasing the branches without the knowledge of the roots.

The Philosophers is indeed king.
Respect to you philosophers.

"...its left for the philosophers to change the world"- Karl Marx.

Fynestboi:



So you are of the opinion that man cannot do the above without a restriction from an authority?

Why would engage in community service if you stand to gain nothing at that point??....would you not only care for your good alone while neglecting the common good?

Toyolad:
Why would engage in community service if you stand to gain nothing at that point??....would you not only care for your good alone while neglecting the common good?

Can you run after a common good without an egoistic motive?

Fynestboi:




Hoping to see you soon bro coz Oau will be calling you guy over from a program soon.

We would be happy to receive the invitation with all arms.

Fynestboi:



Can you run after a common good without an egoistic motive?

Pls kindly modify the Student to Students in the title of this thread

Philosophers in the house lets ponder on this question




The problem of being has been a perennial issue in metaphysics, in attempting to solve this problem what can we regard as a being?

Fynesboi damosky12 Freemanan Toyolad and co over to you

promisechild:
Philosophers in the house lets ponder on this question




The problem of being has been a perennial issue in metaphysics, in attempting to solve this problem what can we regard as a being?

Fynesboi damosky12 Freemanan Toyolad and co over to you

The hardest task in philosophy,I reckon, is defining concepts.... its less hard to consistently defend an assertion against criticism if the definition of the concept is very sound.

Being is ,according to Aristotle, whatever IS....and I agree with him



Fynestboi, where art thou?

Toyolad:
The hardest task in philosophy,I reckon, is defining concepts.... its less hard to consistently defend an assertion against criticism if the definition of the concept is very sound.

Being is ,according to Aristotle, whatever IS....and I agree with him



Fynestboi, where art thou?

my mb go finish ni...

promisechild:
Philosophers in the house lets ponder on this question




The problem of being has been a perennial issue in metaphysics, in attempting to solve this problem what can we regard as a being?

Fynesboi damosky12 Freemanan Toyolad and co over to you

Bro can you kindly drop your submission.... .

Aristotle in his famous saying puts it that 'BEING QUA BEING' meaning Being is being or Being for being. Also the Great existentialist, Martin Heidegger said Being is a thing into death, meaning existence of a being is also a movement towards it's death therefore Being is nothing.

Going from the authorities above, Being is a metaphysical entity that moves in a vicious circle of empty and void purpose. Being is what most see as the essence of existence but this is wrong. I see being in the same light Heidegger sees it. As something that is nothing, that is continually moving towards emptiness.

Since being doesn't have essence on it's own with other things defining him, then Being is JUST nothing. For example, if a child is born today, that child is still a being but what begins to define his beingness is essence and what are these essence? The name he will be given,the language and culture he will learn to give him an identity, the educational line he will toll to make him know things because he came to the world not knowing. So being is actually nothing until these things starts defining him which is the essence. And as the Existentialists will put it "existence precede essence"
This means that for a being to be important, he must exist first before having essence, that he cannot have essence without existing. So the main attribute of a Being is that it must exist. A wood is a being according to my postulation. Humans are beings, cars are beings. All of these are beings because they exist in reality and they all have no purpose without essence, something to give it meaning.

The difference between Humans and Trees or cars under the concept of Beingness, is what Existentialists categorize as Being and being (big Being and small being). This is a discourse for Other day

Cc fynestboi