Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
A little off:
Hunger / suffering and concentration / strength lead to development.
Satiety and relaxation lead to degradation.
Freedom and restrictions always go together, like a river bounded by two banks, and can lead to both development and degradation.
A little more freedom, and the river floods and the current becomes calm and slow. The larger the restrictions and the higher the rocks on both sides of the river, the narrower the river and the faster the current.
Freedom is a CONSCIOUS NECESSITY, that is, a vision of the meaning of restrictions, as pointers of direction for development, to where you have not yet gone and do not know how.
A very simple question and a very simple answer: Freedom is the primary state, and restriction is a definition dependent on freedom. First you need to understand that to limit the subject, you need to initially have it free. Only a free thought can detect a crack in the constraint. To be released from the restriction, the primary concept of freedom must be present. Restrictions do not lead to degradation in any way, since only restrictions are an incentive for freedom, the concepts of which exist primarily initially.
Both options are correct and incorrect at the same time. And here's why.
Part 1. Restrictions.
1) Since the beginning of time, humans and animals have been limited in resources.
Food, territory, females, these resources are not infinite.
And in conditions of restriction, when not everyone can have enough of everything, the struggle begins.
Fighting is competition, the weak die, the strong rise.
Competition is the most natural and ancient way of development.
In fact, it is the basis of natural selection and evolution.
Part 2. Freedom.
2) Everything starts small, at first you just want to get something.
When you get it, you'll want to get more of it.
By getting something in moderation, you're already selecting the best out of it.
Having selected the best, you already want to choose among these best, so that there are already several different options.
And finally, you want a variant that has the properties you need, up to and including the output of this one.
Thus, the development in one of the directions took place before our eyes, not with restrictions, but with an abundance of resources, and moreover, freedom is the second stage after restrictions, the second step in development.
Part 3. Generalization.
3) As we understand, both of these paths lead to development.
Both work at different levels and require different skills.
Constraints require survival in limited resources.
4) But freedom is even more demanding, as it requires survival in the face of unlimited resources.
You will need to constantly evolve to keep up with the trends.
If you stop at least one step , you will be left behind and will constantly increase the gap. These are the laws of the modern market.
Part 4. Contradictions.
Of course, there is a silver lining. But, the opposite is also true.
5) Limitations are degradation.
You degrade in free development in order to survive in specific conditions.
You only develop survival skills and thus stop global development. Globalization is impossible in a strictly limited environment.
6) Freedom is also degradation.
We get too used to good conditions and put us in a harsh environment, say, on a desert island, and most of us will die before we even live a week, because we do not have the skills to survive in the absence of modern gadgets and devices.
Ordinary modern man in primitive conditions is a dead man.
Part 5. The finish line.
From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.
7) At each time will steer some specific qualities.
For example, the ability to survive in harsh environments is completely useless in life in more peaceful times.
And such people often cannot adapt to a peaceful life. I'm talking about the military, who can't even get used to a soft bed and warm food.
8) But as practice has shown, restrictions have a much more effective incentive in the realities of life, for example, competition.
After all, the requirement of constant development is also a kind of restriction that you must adhere to if you want to compete with others.
Rather the former. At least the mechanism of this is clear. Restrictions create inconveniences that you want to overcome. Initially, there is a motivation to change the status quo. And motivation is the main resource that is required for development. And if the limitations can be overcome at all, then there are all prerequisites for development.
Dan Simmons has a character in Hyperion that illustrates this situation well. At one time, he did not come out of cryogenic freezing very successfully and suffered brain damage, as a result of which his vocabulary was reduced to nine words. And only abusive ones. However, he was able to learn to communicate by combining these nine words in such an expressive way that other people understood him. Fortunately, the brain damage was reversible. At some point, he remembered all the other words. And the ability to combine words expressively, which he developed while he knew only nine words, allowed him to become the most famous poet in the galaxy.
Freedom is responsibility (you are responsible for every step – from the morning cup of coffee to participating in political actions. Excuses like “I was taught this way”, “I was advised”, “I did like everyone else” do not roll) and loneliness (there is no collective freedom, just as there is no collective responsibility). You can do what many people do, you can do what everyone else does, but you have to be responsible for each of your actions alone. Under these conditions, you can both develop and roll on an inclined plane. It is important that in the end, you can only blame yourself.
There are different restrictions. The ban on spending time playing farts, shooting games can lead to the development of reading books, classical literature. The freedom to choose the type of idleness will inevitably end in degradation.
Here it is necessary to immediately separate the concepts of “freedom” and”arbitrariness”. It is unlikely that arbitrariness can lead to development.
Perhaps true freedom is possible only in some of the real conditions in which we find ourselves. Then, in order to be free, one must know these very conditions (as in Spinoza – “Freedom is a known necessity”). Only on the solid ground of reality can you develop. In this sense, understanding your limitations leads to true development.
In addition, the introduction of self-restraint ( self-discipline) is also an integral element of development.
But of course, in a situation where there are only limitations (and therefore there is no breadth of the field of view), full-fledged development is also hardly possible. Take a look at the example of the same Kaspar Hauser.
Limitations lead to self-development, increased self-esteem, and certain “generally accepted” achievements.
Freedom(namely, to do what you want, and not to do what you don't want) – to growth(I see it this way – development is attempts to improve yourself, recognition of yourself as imperfect, growth – when you become more), connections with the soul, and eventually(or at the beginning) to happiness.
True, while you can't hear yourself well, you can use your freedom to roll down to where you don't really want to go, but here you can trust yourself first, and then grow wings in flight.
Probably, everything is somehow moving forward and a useful experience, but I like freedom)