TED Conversations

Johnny Mac

Role? Who defines that?, I need to get organized.

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Does "Liberty" mean the pursuit of one's self interest?

Explanation: Liberty in economic terms. By seeking one's own gain, they make gains for everybody. The economy is a mechanism for transforming private gain into public benefit. Each person is a cog in this machine.
Or are all social systems built on the proper understanding of the human person...This person I the source and end of all social and economic value. Which is it? or do you think it is something else?

+4
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Dec 22 2013: Liberty as self intrest, then how does one generate liberty?
    • Dec 22 2013: Liberty isn't self interest. Liberty includes permitting self interest, but liberty is no more self interest than all organisms are ducks.
    • thumb
      Dec 23 2013: I don't believe that anyone can “generate” liberty. Liberty, which is synonymous with freedom, must either be willingly dispensed by, or involuntarily seized from, the source(s) of power. Liberty, in short, is either given or taken.

      When it comes to self-interest, who among us would claim to be perfectly disinterested? We all act, to one degree or another, in our own interest. One can only hope that our self-interest is “enlightened.”
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2013: good direction, but i think liberty can not be given, only taken.
        • thumb
          Dec 23 2013: History supports your assertion, sadly with few exceptions, the "velvet revolution" in 1989 during which the Communist governments of the Warsaw pact allowed themselves to be "sacked" without a shot being fired (except in Ceaușescu's Romania), being one noteworthy example. This time the tanks remained in their garrisons.
        • Dec 23 2013: Pity that it was mostly replaced with authority of poor quality and base self-interests. As usual in such attempts.
    • Dec 23 2013: liberty and society are two opposite things which cannot coexist. If you are in a society, whatever be the form of government, you will have to follow some rules which are necessary for the sustenance of that society. One may or may not like rules. But they have to follow it. And any form of rule, except for the ones decided by an individual for his/herself are an infringement of their liberty.
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2013: you have a hole in your argument. you say: no type of government can coexist with freedom. and then you conclude that no type of society can exist. you missed one type of society: one without a government.
        • Dec 23 2013: well government or not, any society is based on rules that make up the framework of that society. anyone born into that society is expected or conditioned to follow these rules. Even at the cost of personal liberty. In case of a government it happens on a larger scale.
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2013: i see no inherent necessity for any other rules than those protecting other people's freedoms.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.