LogFAQs > #941235322

MedeaLysistrata posted...

Fair enough. Am I right in guessing you are less inclined when it comes to supporting taxation? Or would that be too concrete? Because I am still a bit confused on the terminology using voluntary and involuntary.

Going back and reading older stuff is always fun for me. Also interesting that you put ontology as prior to epistemology... that is truly the greatest rabbit hole, probably

I am wary of too many taxes but understand the need for some because the State in my framework is a necessity for connecting various "societies" (groups of different familial groups sharing similar underpinnings) and offers an outlet of responsibility (increases involuntary liberty...I know I get confused too) via duty.

Another way of thinking about involuntary is using the idea of "thrownness" from Heidegger. It's the situation you are born in. You're born now, where we have ideas of "familiy", "parent", "children", etc...the State doesn't rip your kids away from you...you are able to 'become' a meaningful role. But you have to voluntarily take it.

As far as Ontology preceding epistemology, mimetic ideals of poetry (or art) came first and is grounded in an ontological framework. It was the later romantics that elevated the subject over the object.

Aesthetics and architecture are cool subjects. For architecture I like Roger Scruton though I'm sure on this board he isn't well received due to his politics. But his ideas on form and function make sense to me (he claims it is rather funny how we find new function for beautiful forms and we repurpose those. I'm not a big form follows function type of person as it removes all beauty from our built world!)

MedeaLysistrata posted...

Interesting, is that where the voluntary/involuntary liberties distinction is from?

No, I got a lot about the nature of suffering and meaning from his book (Man's search for meaning). He was a Nazi POW and its revealing how he was able to get through that. If anyone knows about suffering, I'd imagine its him. Peterson obviously read his works as well and talks about the same themes.

The voluntary/involuntary distinction was me trying to figure out why liberalism today is so different from classical liberalism. I think its because classical liberalism was built on elevating involuntary meaning (build society so individuals can go out and live as meaningful a life as they want) and liberalism today elevates voluntary liberty (you ought to be able to take whatever action you want and there should be no loss of quality of life)...or something in that realm.