|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
03-29-2011, 12:18 PM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
The "Social Contract".
Some question was raised concerning the "Social Contract" that d-ray often refers to. I thought I would post this link to further clarify the meaning of "social contract". I decided to put it in this forum since it seems to encompass all aspects of human social interaction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
Thoughts, opinions?
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
03-29-2011, 12:21 PM
|
Abby Normal
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 11,245
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
Some question was raised concerning the "Social Contract" that d-ray often refers to. I thought I would post this link to further clarify the meaning of "social contract". I decided to put it in this forum since it seems to encompass all aspects of human social interaction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract
Thoughts, opinions?
Dave
|
my though is that corporatism looks at this with disdain
|
03-29-2011, 02:02 PM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,914
|
|
The criticism I hear from Whell or read in this link has to do with the semantic use of the word "contract." Somehow, the criticism seems to use the legal meaning of "contract" as a trump card to invalidate the notion of a "social contract."
Isn't that kinda like saying that you need to give a rabies shot to a hot dog?
As a German speaker, I'm quite familiar with compound words and am able to recognize that "social contract" is a compound word used to explain a concept that differs materially from "contract" used in a purely legal context.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
03-30-2011, 01:28 AM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
The criticism I hear from Whell or read in this link has to do with the semantic use of the word "contract." Somehow, the criticism seems to use the legal meaning of "contract" as a trump card to invalidate the notion of a "social contract."
Isn't that kinda like saying that you need to give a rabies shot to a hot dog?
As a German speaker, I'm quite familiar with compound words and am able to recognize that "social contract" is a compound word used to explain a concept that differs materially from "contract" used in a purely legal context.
|
Much better explanation than any damn lawyer would give.
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
03-30-2011, 08:25 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,914
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
Much better explanation than any damn lawyer would give.
Regards,
D-Ray
|
I'm on a slippery slope, it appears.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
03-30-2011, 10:27 AM
|
|
Area Man
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Swamp
Posts: 27,407
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
The criticism I hear from Whell or read in this link has to do with the semantic use of the word "contract." Somehow, the criticism seems to use the legal meaning of "contract" as a trump card to invalidate the notion of a "social contract."
Isn't that kinda like saying that you need to give a rabies shot to a hot dog?
As a German speaker, I'm quite familiar with compound words and am able to recognize that "social contract" is a compound word used to explain a concept that differs materially from "contract" used in a purely legal context.
|
It's because "Social Contract" sounds and is, in some measure, collectivist. It rubs their "every man for himself" mentality the wrong way. The "Law of the Jungle" appeals to their base primal instincts and is therefore more compatible with the modern conservative mentality. Baboons don't pool their resources to care for other Baboons that can't keep up with the troupe, they bite and stomp them to death to prevent them from holding the others back. See what I'm sayin'?
Dave
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
|
03-30-2011, 11:47 AM
|
|
Loyal Opposition
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Johnson County, Kansas
Posts: 14,401
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
It's because "Social Contract" sounds and is, in some measure, collectivist. It rubs their "every man for himself" mentality the wrong way. The "Law of the Jungle" appeals to their base primal instincts and is therefore more compatible with the modern conservative mentality. Baboons don't pool their resources to care for other Baboons that can't keep up with the troupe, they bite and stomp them to death to prevent them from holding the others back. See what I'm sayin'?
Dave
|
You're cold brother. Interestingly, many of the conservatives who reject evolution also embrace economic Darwinism - the survival of the fittest. Some of us would see that as survival of the creatures who place profits above all other values. Concern for the environment, concern for the plight of working people, concern for the community are all signs of weakness, unless such concern can be leveraged to enhance profits.
I wonder what a society would look like if it was based on the golden rule stated in the Bible rather than the one that states "them that's got the gold makes the rules."
Regards,
D-Ray
__________________
Then I'll get on my knees and pray,
We won't get fooled again; Don't get fooled again
|
07-23-2011, 05:46 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
Concern for the environment, concern for the plight of working people, concern for the community are all signs of weakness, unless such concern can be leveraged to enhance taxes.
D-Ray
|
I fixed it to represent our current federal government.
YAWN...this thread sucks.
Last edited by djv8ga; 07-23-2011 at 05:52 PM.
|
07-24-2011, 04:37 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, Tennessee
Posts: 1,145
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by d-ray657
You're cold brother. Interestingly, many of the conservatives who reject evolution also embrace economic Darwinism - the survival of the fittest. Some of us would see that as survival of the creatures who place profits above all other values. Concern for the environment, concern for the plight of working people, concern for the community are all signs of weakness, unless such concern can be leveraged to enhance profits.
I wonder what a society would look like if it was based on the golden rule stated in the Bible rather than the one that states "them that's got the gold makes the rules."
Regards,
D-Ray
|
Don't think ANY economic conservatives "embrace economic Darwinism". They DO however recognize that an individual's economic status is largely the result of a bunch of VOLUNTARY choices over which strangers SHOULD NOT have dictatorial control... The INVOLUNTARY choices are the ones we should focus our "social justice" on..
Let's put some concrete to this.. Public Housing.. We REQUIRE a bunch of stuff from folks that live in public housing. We require that they give up their 2nd Amend. rights in some cases. We require that they give up certain 4th and 5th amendments (inspections and admin access) that others are not asked to give up. Many grannies have been booted from public housing because some niece or nephew was peddling dope from her door. I THINK -- that public housing OUGHT TO BE contigient on keeping your kids in SCHOOL until they get a diploma --- but we can't ask THAT can WE????
So how do you make a UNIVERSAL "contract" with people you don't know, will never meet and have no mutual influence? Those things don't phase the lefties.. They LOVE UNIVERSAL solutions.. But even in the case of the altruistic, all-loving, all-caring govt --- they ask for shit in return for handouts. One size fits all solutions to every ill. Heck they can make Rhodes scholars out of kids with Crack moms..
Same in the private charities -- Kind of... You might be asked to praise the lord in exchange for a meal. Or to help sweep the stairwells -- the kinda of stuff that causes holy revolution to break out if you tried that crap in PUBLIC housing..
MY humble opinion of the social contract is that you work for better options for people striving to do the right things. Like choices in public education for parents whogiveashit. And real freedom to drive a cab.. Not just a job for guys who have an uncle in City Hall.
And anyone that falls by the wayside needs one-on-one time -- not just a check and some cheese -- to fix their problems..
It's the diff between the functional, the "couldbe" functional, the "usedtobe" functional, and the dysfunctional that makes the idea of a UNIVERSAL social contract a non-starting pipedream...
Can we ask you not to break-dance or gang-bang your way thru high school til you predictably drop-out? NO - we can't.. Because of respect for individual soveignty -- you know -- that old dead LIBERAL concept that died with heart of the Democrat party....
Last edited by flacaltenn; 07-24-2011 at 04:44 PM.
|
07-23-2011, 08:43 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: colorado
Posts: 1,595
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueStreak
It's because "Social Contract" sounds and is, in some measure, collectivist. It rubs their "every man for himself" mentality the wrong way. The "Law of the Jungle" appeals to their base primal instincts and is therefore more compatible with the modern conservative mentality. Baboons don't pool their resources to care for other Baboons that can't keep up with the troupe, they bite and stomp them to death to prevent them from holding the others back. See what I'm sayin'?
Dave
|
Excellent point. Take this to the extreme, where we have no "social contact".
Everyman for himself. The ultimate winner has everything, and no one else even exhists. What is the point to being super wealthy or well tto do if there are no other humans to (pick your thoughts - rule over, share with, make jealous, take more from, give to, etc).
Monopoly is a fun game, but in real life it would suck. I win and have everything - no one else has anything.
So being human means being social. Without a person might as well crawl under a rock and live entirely uninterruped for the remainder of their life.
BTW - excellent link and great thread too.
__________________
Instead of a debate, how about a discussion? I want to learn, I don't care about winning.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37 AM.
|