PDA

View Full Version : Point of Narcisisism, am I too Liberal?



AJBIGJ
12-03-2013, 02:25 AM
I have to relent, "Classical Liberalism" has taken on entirely different definitions in this day and age. In fact, many of those who laid out the groundwork of this philosophy could very easily speak for me. I try to raise independent thought (and occasionally succeed) but the precursors made a lot of sense!


Yet I can't say the original philosophy lacks merit (especially since I indulge in its tenets).
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Classical_liberalism.html
By the definition at hand, do you agree with it in principle or disagree, why?

imnohero
12-03-2013, 04:28 AM
The originators of the philosophy, Locke, Kant, Say, and others, were motived by a keen interest in justice, defining what a "just government" would be, deep concerns about individual morality and what equality founded on individual soveriegnty would look like. They were writing and thinking about societies with deep inequalities and "divine kings" and the like. For my part, I lean toward Kant rather than Locke with the expected consequences regarding modern ideas of liberalism.

AJBIGJ
12-03-2013, 12:04 PM
The originators of the philosophy, Locke, Kant, Say, and others, were motived by a keen interest in justice, defining what a "just government" would be, deep concerns about individual morality and what equality founded on individual soveriegnty would look like. They were writing and thinking about societies with deep inequalities and "divine kings" and the like. For my part, I lean toward Kant rather than Locke with the expected consequences regarding modern ideas of liberalism.

I tend to float more in the direction of Locke and quite a bit of Adams, if such makes sense.