Your ideas on self-actualization through self-sufficiency are interesting. I didn't expect your sudden swerve to the right:
"But today’s philosophy concentrates on privilege, social justice, and the evils of capitalism."
That may be true of some on the far left. The far right has a very different philosophy, which seems like it's point-for-point the opposite of the left -- it sometimes seems to be defined by "whatever they say, I'm against it." So "today's philosophy" is not monolithic, it's both extremes as well as many in the middle.
Re your statement, it's self-evident that unregulated, pure capitalism has terrible outcomes for a nation: the pure profit motive will destroy the land and abuse people, to achieve short-term profits. Only regulation will prevent a corporation from poisoning downstream waters, and I'm sure we agree that's not OK. So, capitalism isn't necessarily evil; unregulated capitalism can run amok. I'm sure you practice decency in your business because you're a decent person, but that individual sense of ethics and values doesn't survive at the scale of large corporations.
Likewise, privilege is real: those with great power and wealth got there through circumstances and luck, in addition to being smart and working hard. Many smart, hard-working people will never get the breaks that enable them to escape poverty. Where you're born, how you're raised and educated, the people you know make a __huge__ difference. Do you not agree that those who have more should feel obligated to help those who do not? This was always part of our founding traditions.
You sneer at "social justice." But I'm sure you personally recognize that when someone is treated unfairly, there should be consequences, and they should be made whole. If a competitor cheated and stole your business, you'd want them to make things right -- reparations, consequences. If someone attacked your family, you'd want justice. So what exactly about social justice don't you agree with?
I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of people are somewhere in the middle. I actually believe that slavery was a terrible injustice, yet I would never make the ridiculously extreme statements you attribute to "these dancers." Do you reject the basic fact that there is injustice in our country today? Do you reject the idea that we all should be concerned with the common good, with working towards a more perfect union? And that everyone has the right to a [decent] life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
I'm curious what triggered your somewhat vitriolic attack on what you called "today's philosophy" in the context of Maslow, self-actualization, self-sufficiency? Do you really believe anyone is an innocent bystander--that the system we live in has no responsibility for ongoing inequities and injustice?
So much of what's wrong has nothing to do with race; poverty in this country is nearly impossible to escape, and the majority of the poor are white. Do you reject a progressive tax system where those with much contribute more to the common good? That we the people, as represented by our government, should always be trying to reach the ideals this country was founded on?
Fascinating thoughts on Maslows hierarchy
Because they ignored those who fill the basic needs they de industrialized the western world
I was thinking this recently how happy the people were building their own simple houses harvesting their crops etc
Lots of corporate jobs can be boring so people seek to feel alive by sky diving or climbing rock faces
Racing of cars
Self actuality through risk of personal safety
I like reading philosophy books
Have fallen through the ice, been on fire, been in quicksand, been in a car fire and two car accidents
Don’t need any more of that
Your ideas on self-actualization through self-sufficiency are interesting. I didn't expect your sudden swerve to the right:
"But today’s philosophy concentrates on privilege, social justice, and the evils of capitalism."
That may be true of some on the far left. The far right has a very different philosophy, which seems like it's point-for-point the opposite of the left -- it sometimes seems to be defined by "whatever they say, I'm against it." So "today's philosophy" is not monolithic, it's both extremes as well as many in the middle.
Re your statement, it's self-evident that unregulated, pure capitalism has terrible outcomes for a nation: the pure profit motive will destroy the land and abuse people, to achieve short-term profits. Only regulation will prevent a corporation from poisoning downstream waters, and I'm sure we agree that's not OK. So, capitalism isn't necessarily evil; unregulated capitalism can run amok. I'm sure you practice decency in your business because you're a decent person, but that individual sense of ethics and values doesn't survive at the scale of large corporations.
Likewise, privilege is real: those with great power and wealth got there through circumstances and luck, in addition to being smart and working hard. Many smart, hard-working people will never get the breaks that enable them to escape poverty. Where you're born, how you're raised and educated, the people you know make a __huge__ difference. Do you not agree that those who have more should feel obligated to help those who do not? This was always part of our founding traditions.
You sneer at "social justice." But I'm sure you personally recognize that when someone is treated unfairly, there should be consequences, and they should be made whole. If a competitor cheated and stole your business, you'd want them to make things right -- reparations, consequences. If someone attacked your family, you'd want justice. So what exactly about social justice don't you agree with?
I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of people are somewhere in the middle. I actually believe that slavery was a terrible injustice, yet I would never make the ridiculously extreme statements you attribute to "these dancers." Do you reject the basic fact that there is injustice in our country today? Do you reject the idea that we all should be concerned with the common good, with working towards a more perfect union? And that everyone has the right to a [decent] life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
I'm curious what triggered your somewhat vitriolic attack on what you called "today's philosophy" in the context of Maslow, self-actualization, self-sufficiency? Do you really believe anyone is an innocent bystander--that the system we live in has no responsibility for ongoing inequities and injustice?
So much of what's wrong has nothing to do with race; poverty in this country is nearly impossible to escape, and the majority of the poor are white. Do you reject a progressive tax system where those with much contribute more to the common good? That we the people, as represented by our government, should always be trying to reach the ideals this country was founded on?