Australian Politics Forum - Eagle and Lamb

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Eagle and Lamb
Mar 4^th, 2011 at 3:41pm

A bit of a controversial topic but nonetheless an interesting one.

If the lamb demands the eagle to act like the lamb, thus insinuating the eagle has free will, should the eagle also demand the lamb act like the eagle, thus insinuating the lamb also has free will?

In other words, if the more passive members of a society demand the more outgoing members act just like them, should not also the outgoing members demand the passive act like them?

The topic comes from the invention of "free will" by the passive members of society to impose rules upon the stronger. It insinuates that the stronger have the "free will" to not act strong. Does this mean the passive have the "free will" to act strongly?

I am a bit split on this one. While we can't have remorseless subjugation of the weak, there should still be allowed some kind of outlet for the strong to discharge their strength.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #1 - Mar 5^th, 2011 at 7:39pm

This is a very loaded parable.

Society is not masde up of eagles and lambs. Excellence and success are not at the expense of the indolent. Stick with the classics, Time, and rephrase your dilemma in terms of ant and grasshoppers.

One bright day in late autumn a family of Ants were bustling about in the warm sunshine, drying out the grain they had stored up during the summer, when a starving Grasshopper, his fiddle under his arm, came up and humbly begged for a bite to eat.

"What!" cried the Ants in surprise, "haven't you stored anything away for the winter? What in the world were you doing all last summer?"

"I didn't have time to store up any food," whined the Grasshopper; "I was so busy making music that before I knew it the summer was gone."

The Ants shrugged their shoulders in disgust.

"Making music, were you?" they cried. "Very well; now dance!" And they turned their backs on the Grasshopper and went on with their work.

There's a time for work and a time for play.

If the 'lambs' can't tell the differnce between play time and work time, when does that become a concern for the 'eagles.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 6^th, 2011 at 1:22pm by Soren »

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #2 - Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:16pm

I should have phrased my op better. It's actually about the invention of free will by the passive in order to make the more outgoing feel bad for what they do. It's about introjecting guilt into the minds of those who are successful. It's really a game played by the passive in order to feel as superior as the successful. In short, they will claim: passive, meekness = good. Strong, outgoing = bad.

It raises the question: if the strong have free will to be passive, do the passive have the free will to be strong?

Back to top

IP Logged

...

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 23673
WA
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #3 - Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:26pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 4^th, 2011 at 3:41pm:

A bit of a controversial topic but nonetheless an interesting one.

If the lamb demands the eagle to act like the lamb, thus insinuating the eagle has free will, should the eagle also demand the lamb act like the eagle, thus insinuating the lamb also has free will?

In other words, if the more passive members of a society demand the more outgoing members act just like them, should not also the outgoing members demand the passive act like them?

The topic comes from the invention of "free will" by the passive members of society to impose rules upon the stronger. It insinuates that the stronger have the "free will" to not act strong. Does this mean the passive have the "free will" to act strongly?

I am a bit split on this one. While we can't have remorseless subjugation of the weak, there should still be allowed some kind of outlet for the strong to discharge their strength.

So, say a man was a great boxer. He shouldn't exercise his skills on the weak (lambs), to show compassion for them.
But where is he to hone and display his skills? In competition with other boxers, (eagles)

So this is where the strong have their outlet - by organised competition against those who would provide a challenge, and thus a sense of accomplishment at having met that challenge.

Back to top

In the fullness of time...

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #4 - Mar 9^th, 2011 at 4:16pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:16pm:

I should have phrased my op better. It's actually about the invention of free will by the passive in order to make the more outgoing feel bad for what they do. It's about introjecting guilt into the minds of those who are successful. It's really a game played by the passive in order to feel as superior as the successful. In short, they will claim: passive, meekness = good. Strong, outgoing = bad.

It raises the question: if the strong have free will to be passive, do the passive have the free will to be strong?

Have you been reading Nietzsche's crap about slave morality??

Back to top

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #5 - Mar 9^th, 2011 at 6:02pm

... wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:26pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 4^th, 2011 at 3:41pm:

A bit of a controversial topic but nonetheless an interesting one.

If the lamb demands the eagle to act like the lamb, thus insinuating the eagle has free will, should the eagle also demand the lamb act like the eagle, thus insinuating the lamb also has free will?

In other words, if the more passive members of a society demand the more outgoing members act just like them, should not also the outgoing members demand the passive act like them?

The topic comes from the invention of "free will" by the passive members of society to impose rules upon the stronger. It insinuates that the stronger have the "free will" to not act strong. Does this mean the passive have the "free will" to act strongly?

I am a bit split on this one. While we can't have remorseless subjugation of the weak, there should still be allowed some kind of outlet for the strong to discharge their strength.

So, say a man was a great boxer. He shouldn't exercise his skills on the weak (lambs), to show compassion for them.
But where is he to hone and display his skills? In competition with other boxers, (eagles)

So this is where the strong have their outlet - by organised competition against those who would provide a challenge, and thus a sense of accomplishment at having met that challenge.

Yeah, that's an excellent example of what I had in mind.

Back to top

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #6 - Mar 9^th, 2011 at 6:03pm

Soren wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 4:16pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:16pm:

I should have phrased my op better. It's actually about the invention of free will by the passive in order to make the more outgoing feel bad for what they do. It's about introjecting guilt into the minds of those who are successful. It's really a game played by the passive in order to feel as superior as the successful. In short, they will claim: passive, meekness = good. Strong, outgoing = bad.

It raises the question: if the strong have free will to be passive, do the passive have the free will to be strong?

Have you been reading Nietzsche's crap about slave morality??

Brilliant refutation. Smiley

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #7 - Mar 28^th, 2011 at 10:20am

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 6:03pm:

Soren wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 4:16pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:16pm:

I should have phrased my op better. It's actually about the invention of free will by the passive in order to make the more outgoing feel bad for what they do. It's about introjecting guilt into the minds of those who are successful. It's really a game played by the passive in order to feel as superior as the successful. In short, they will claim: passive, meekness = good. Strong, outgoing = bad.

It raises the question: if the strong have free will to be passive, do the passive have the free will to be strong?

Have you been reading Nietzsche's crap about slave morality??

Brilliant refutation. Smiley

Not a refutation in itself, just a question with a judgement thrown in for free.

Back to top

IP Logged

Belgarion

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5395
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #8 - Mar 28^th, 2011 at 10:37am

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 9^th, 2011 at 12:16pm:

I should have phrased my op better. It's actually about the invention of free will by the passive in order to make the more outgoing feel bad for what they do. It's about introjecting guilt into the minds of those who are successful. It's really a game played by the passive in order to feel as superior as the successful. In short, they will claim: passive, meekness = good. Strong, outgoing = bad.

It raises the question: if the strong have free will to be passive, do the passive have the free will to be strong?

The passive may have the free will to be strong, but do they have the ability? The eagle can choose to soar and swoop on its prey, or to sit passivley and let it pass, but the lamb cannot, with all the free will in the world soar like an eagle and seize its prey the same way. It must sit passively and let it pass.

Back to top

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III Gold Member Offline Posts: 10259 Gender:	Re: Eagle and Lamb Reply #9 - Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:39pm Do you think, though, free will and the ability to do something is the same thing? I am not sure what you mean here: Quote: The passive may have the free will to be strong, but do they have the ability?
Back to top	IP Logged

Belgarion

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5395
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #10 - Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:52pm

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

Do you think, though, free will and the ability to do something is the same thing?

I am not sure what you mean here:
Quote:

The passive may have the free will to be strong, but do they have the ability?

No, free will and the ability to do something are not the same thing, free will is seperate from ability. Simply having the will or desire to do something does not make it possible. All the free will in the world will not enable the lamb to fly like the eagle. However the eagle may choose to remain earthbound like the lamb.

However does the lamb have the right to demand the eagle remain earthbound because the lamb itself is unable to fly?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:57pm by Belgarion »

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21488
A cat with a view

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #11 - Mar 29^th, 2011 at 9:12am

We seem to live in an age where those without merit, want to justify their own 'entitlement'.

This paradigm 'does not fly' in nature.

But man is a perverse creature, perhaps he can empower such a paradigm ?

"I exist, therefore i have the rights enjoyed by all others."

+++

Personally, i prefer the ants and grasshoppers paradigm of how the universe works.

I believe that advancement on merit, is what God, and what nature [God's creation] reward.

And that there is a good reason for [good reasoning behind] this model, of how things should work.

The 'universal' 'entitlement' paradigm that we see being embraced today, by the 'common man', is merely a socially engineered contagion [a 'creation', of the basest of men] which sidelines, 'disenfranchises', the meritorious, AND, will quickly spread the basest, most merit-less characteristics in men, imo.

Witness the world of man, in this age.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 29^th, 2011 at 9:23am by Yadda »

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #12 - Mar 29^th, 2011 at 2:40pm

Belgarion wrote on Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:52pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Mar 28^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

Do you think, though, free will and the ability to do something is the same thing?

I am not sure what you mean here:
Quote:

The passive may have the free will to be strong, but do they have the ability?

No, free will and the ability to do something are not the same thing, free will is seperate from ability. Simply having the will or desire to do something does not make it possible. All the free will in the world will not enable the lamb to fly like the eagle. However the eagle may choose to remain earthbound like the lamb.

However does the lamb have the right to demand the eagle remain earthbound because the lamb itself is unable to fly?

I think we have a different understanding of free will. It seems you are equating it with just a desire to do something?

The way I understand it, and the way it is to be understood in the op is, does someone have the capability to do something.

Back to top

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 10259
Gender: male

Re: Eagle and Lamb
Reply #13 - Mar 29^th, 2011 at 2:42pm

Yadda wrote on Mar 29^th, 2011 at 9:12am:

We seem to live in an age where those without merit, want to justify their own 'entitlement'.

This paradigm 'does not fly' in nature.

But man is a perverse creature, perhaps he can empower such a paradigm ?

"I exist, therefore i have the rights enjoyed by all others."

+++

Personally, i prefer the ants and grasshoppers paradigm of how the universe works.

I believe that advancement on merit, is what God, and what nature [God's creation] reward.

And that there is a good reason for [good reasoning behind] this model, of how things should work.

The 'universal' 'entitlement' paradigm that we see being embraced today, by the 'common man', is merely a socially engineered contagion [a 'creation', of the basest of men] which sidelines, 'disenfranchises', the meritorious, AND, will quickly spread the basest, most merit-less characteristics in men, imo.

Witness the world of man, in this age.

Whaddya know, we do agree on something.

Back to top

IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid III Gold Member Offline Posts: 10259 Gender:	Re: Eagle and Lamb Reply #14 - Mar 29^th, 2011 at 3:07pm The Eagle was the symbol of the Roman Empire, the Lamb is the symbol of Christianity. So it's not necessarily about ants and grasshoppers and work and resource storage.
Back to top	IP Logged