| | |
|
JonathanBoyerFirstPaper 4 - 27 Apr 2010 - Main.JonathanBoyer
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper%25" |
|---|
*UNDER CONSTRUCTION* | | | After all, it's just a ride, it's just a ride -- no need to run, no need to hide. Sooner or later, it all comes crashing down, and when you ain't got nothin', you got nothin' to loose -- you're invisible now; you got no secrets to conceal. And when I'm at the pearly gates, this'll be on my videotape. It all might seem dumb . . . or maybe just happy -- I think I'm just happy.
| |
<
< | Should this Nirvana-esque retreat to an inner citadel remain free of intrusion as a kind of negative liberty, or must one be protected against any tendency to "go too far, contract [one]self into too small a space, [where one] shall suffocate and die"? Such a conflict of interests between Nirvana seekers and appointed protectors necessarily extends the call for negative liberty into a debate about the positive, as these two concepts of liberty are often in conflict themselves. On the one hand, those concerned about privacy reform in the digital age might argue that positive liberty in this context necessarily requires the knowledge and will to protect against threats to one's privacy. Nirvana seekers, on the other hand, might argue | >
> | Should this Nirvana-esque retreat to an inner citadel remain free of impediments as a kind of negative liberty, or must one be protected against any tendency to "go too far, contract [one]self into too small a space, [where one] shall suffocate and die"? Such a conflict of interests between Nirvana seekers and appointed protectors necessarily extends the call for negative liberty into a debate about the positive, as these two concepts of liberty are often in conflict themselves. On the one hand, those concerned about privacy reform in the digital age might argue that positive liberty in this context necessarily requires the knowledge and will to protect against threats to one's privacy. Nirvana seekers, on the other hand, might argue that, in its essence, positive liberty entitles individuals to be sufficiently equipped to reach the potential of their own self-directed pursuits. But regardless of the side chosen in this debate, and withstanding the Kantian axiom that paternalism is the greatest despotism imaginable, it is an inescapable reality that compulsive education is a societal imperative -- to a debatable extent of course.
"Children cannot be expected to understand why they are compelled to go to school, nor the ignorant [or dumb] - that is, for the moment, the majority of mankind - why they are made to obey the laws that will presently make them rational. 'Compulsion is also a kind of education." . . . You want to be a human being. It is the aim of the state to satisfy your wish. 'Compulsion is justified by education for future insight.'" | | | **Note: All unlinked quotations were taken from Berlin's "Two Concepts of Liberty" |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |