Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News To what idea are you most loyal?

  1. Oct 16, 2005 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    What do you consider to be the basis or roots of your political philosophy and opinions? Is it Plato, the plight a certain group like the Palestinians, a cause such as environmentalism, national loyalty and basic patriotism, a greater concept or ideal such as world peace, an economic ideal, or a simple "what's best for me" perspective?

    In my case, as most here probably know, it's the U.S. Constitution. I believe when honored and enforced, this document, and esp the Bill of Rights, thus far sets the standard for enlightened government. However I must say that I was quite impressed with the Canadian Constitution. In particular I found the right to conscience intriguing.
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 16, 2005 #2

    The idea that included, and was not limited to, i believing that attaining a "rightstate", the state in which there is not any desire for any particular thing and that "rightvision", 3D vision and that of the 'first-person', was possible and attained, only because "I" intended to not do any particular thing and was not loyal to any particular idea, including the "rightpath".

  4. Oct 16, 2005 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'm not sure if "loyal" is the right word, but anyway, it would have to be the Constitution and the principles on which it and this country were based. Locke and such.

    A close second would be the principles of morality. The Moral Imperative, in particular.
  5. Oct 16, 2005 #4
    "We Sink or Swim Together"
  6. Oct 16, 2005 #5

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Who are "we"?
  7. Oct 16, 2005 #6


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I believe I am "loyal" (also don't think thats the right word) to the idea that people should be accountable to themselves in general. If you want something, you work for it. If you know something is your fault, you take responsibility. If you see something you don't like, fix it yourself. Basically, don't let other people do your work for you.
  8. Oct 16, 2005 #7

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It will be very interesting to see who chooses not to respond to this thread, don't you think?

    How does this translate as a political philosphy? In other words, how does this determine your political bias?
  9. Oct 16, 2005 #8
    My logic, my distaste for hegemony by any party, my support for strength in numbers.
  10. Oct 16, 2005 #9
    As it applies to countries and governments: A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.
  11. Oct 16, 2005 #10
    then what do you have to say about the usa?
  12. Oct 16, 2005 #11
    Ultimately, the enlightenment of humanity. Specifically: socialism, veganism, and (real) education.
  13. Oct 16, 2005 #12
    Too many weak links and the whole blasted chain is rusting.
  14. Oct 16, 2005 #13
    claps hands
  15. Oct 17, 2005 #14
    Then you should be even more delighted with the US Constitution. It does not give you rights; it assumes you already have them. If you can define “the right to conscience”, a US citizen already possesses it. All constitutions limit individual rights to enable a society to exist, a fault and a blessing.

    [Edit} I found this in correspondance from Madison to Jefferson; "because there is great reason to fear that a positive declaration of some of the most essential rights could not be obtained in the requisite latitude. I am sure that the rights of conscience in particular, if submitted to public definition would be narrowed much more than they are likely ever to be by an assumed power."

    I detest the liberal political philosophy nicely expressed by this platitude.

    QUOTE=Smasherman] Ultimately, the enlightenment of humanity. Specifically:
    socialism, veganism, and (real) education. [/QUOTE]

    I am loyal to a political philosophy that allows me to live my life as I wish to live it, as free as possible from external influence. That may be considered a “what’s best for me” philosophy but some of my tangible and intangible wealth, that which allows me to live as I wish to live was made possible by the society I live in. I am indebted to society. The degree of indebtedness, my fair share, is something only I can determine.

    Although not a political philosophy, I am also loyal to capitalism.
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 17, 2005
  16. Oct 17, 2005 #15
    The whole constitution or just the Charter?
  17. Oct 17, 2005 #16


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    'scientia vincere tenebras'
  18. Oct 17, 2005 #17
    Wisdom will vanquish Darkness

    how cute.
  19. Oct 17, 2005 #18


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    The only idea I can think of that I am truly wedded to is epistemological, not political. That idea is simply empiricism. Frankly, it is difficult to apply the kind of inductive logical precepts that work so well for the hard sciences to politics, but even so, speculative theorizing*, while nice to engage in, is never going to convince me of anything. Outside of that, I suppose I am fairly well wedded to ethical libertarianism as well, the idea that no action is wrong unless it results in unauthorized harm to a moral agent. I'm sure this shapes my political thinking in some way.

    *Especially of the Hegelian idealist mode, which, to me, includes Marxist historical thought. This also colors my political thinking. It is probably somewhat unfair to group social theorists in completely with the kind of speculative metaphysics that ruled continental philosophy in the late modern era, but given the influence, it is hard for me not to.
  20. Oct 17, 2005 #19


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    As a more elaborate version of this:

    "Human thought should never submit Itself,
    neither to a dogma, nor to a party,
    nor to a passion, nor to an interest,
    nor to a preconceived idea, nor to anything,
    but to the facts themselves,
    because for it to submit,
    would mean the end of its existence."

    H. Poincare.
  21. Oct 17, 2005 #20
    Free and fair trade
    Speration of Buisness and Politics
    Reduced world poverty
    The UN

    Your selfish views and his global views can co-exsit, can they not? Or do you feel so threaten by having the bottom of the pile on equal footing with you that you cant fathom someone wanting to help others to be as good or better then you? If you are "free and liberated" whats your problem with others being as "free and liberated" as you? And whats your problem within your freedom to allow others to exercise there freedom to bring the poor and uneducated more eqaulity with you, as long as it wont impede on your freedom?

    I find your hatered an oximorron.
    Last edited: Oct 17, 2005
  22. Oct 17, 2005 #21


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    freedom and opportunity
  23. Oct 17, 2005 #22


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    1. Freedom.

    2. A safe community to live in where a person can expect to make a reasonable living.

    The second is the purpose for government. Finding the right balance between the amount of government needed for the second and the idea that people should generally be free from government is the hardest part.
  24. Oct 17, 2005 #23
    A world where private banks wont make profit for doing nothing.

    And a world where painted paper (Money) would not be an obstacle to development and improvement.
  25. Oct 17, 2005 #24
    Reason and as a consequence individual rights.
  26. Oct 17, 2005 #25

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Yet we find that driving is a privilege, not a right, and conscientious objectors were forced to flee to Canada during the Vietnam war. So I think there's still plenty of room for improvement.

    From the Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Which is generally taken to mean: All is retained which has not been surrendered. But in practice rights are not assumed to exist. I see this as one of the great failings of Constitutional law.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook