I disagree, you should always be yourself because you trying to be anythings
else is basically a lie to those around you as well as yourself.
I highly doubt that will lead to anarchy given the social nature of humans. Its
a part of being free to choose what YOU want to do but in making that choice YOU
have to accept any and every consequence that comes about because of it.
both have their flaws. someone could be an individual and still be an idiot, and
a whole lot of people could be collectively idiots. Inferior individuals must be
eradicated at all cost. In the name of Kira it must be done.
Quote by MnemethI disagree, you should
always be yourself because you trying to be anythings else is basically a lie to
those around you as well as yourself.
I highly doubt that will lead to anarchy given the social nature of humans. Its
a part of being free to choose what YOU want to do but in making that choice YOU
have to accept any and every consequence that comes about because of
it.
i'm inclined to agree with ProgramZERO. however as with all things in life there
are times that exceptions should be allowed. individual talents ARE definitely
important.
I think that it is important to be yourself and not try to act different because
you are worried about what others will think. But if you are talking about
individualism where actions are concerned I think that you need to think of
others before yourself. Today's society is so wrapped up in self that families
are falling apart and no one helps there neighbors anymore. We have this really
elderly lady that lives next door to us and when it snows I am the only one out
there helping her. Before I moved in she did it all by herself. This makes me so
angry because everyone on our street but us have a snow blower. It would only
take them a second to clear her walk but no they do their own and go inside.
What is wrong with people? The elderly are the reason why we are here and have
the things we do today and they deserve respect and appreciation.
Families fall apart because the husband and wife become selfish and just decide
the can't handle it anymore. But do they even try to get along? What about
marriage counciling? They don't even try anymore.
Sorry for the rant but come on people!
Total individualism leads to a cold society where depredation, selfhisness,
sucess stepping over other people, money and materialism are looked after as
"values". The law of the jungle, where the fittest and strongest
prevails. The weak, the needed, the poor are ignored. Nietzche's
paradise.
The other extreme leads to the negation of the individual. A person is just a
wheel of a big machine, that usually is the state. The current phylosophies of
marxism looked after an utopia that in practice becomes a hell on Earth.
Curiosly, a society where everyone should be equal, the leaders become
ego-centered, and the heads of the state, an oligarcy. And in the name of the
state, they murder: Stalin killed far more pople than Hitler and Mao killed more
than Stalin. Pol-Pot murdered a quarter of the population of Camboya. Castro did
his thing, also. Coming next: Chavez.
What fais in both extremes?: I think that it's the thirst of power, and the
ignorance of the people.
Quote by dipanwitai'm inclined to agree
with ProgramZERO. however as with all things in life there are times that
exceptions should be allowed. individual talents ARE definitely
important.
Everything in moderation, including
moderation.
which is pretty much my philosophy on... well, everything.
should individualism be encouraged and collectivism totally disregarded? give opinions
I don't think it should be that encouraged but you do have a point(It could give rise to things like anarchism)
I disagree, you should always be yourself because you trying to be anythings else is basically a lie to those around you as well as yourself.
I highly doubt that will lead to anarchy given the social nature of humans. Its a part of being free to choose what YOU want to do but in making that choice YOU have to accept any and every consequence that comes about because of it.
A balance of both. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.
both have their flaws. someone could be an individual and still be an idiot, and a whole lot of people could be collectively idiots. Inferior individuals must be eradicated at all cost. In the name of Kira it must be done.
Good Response
i'm inclined to agree with ProgramZERO. however as with all things in life there are times that exceptions should be allowed. individual talents ARE definitely important.
I think that it is important to be yourself and not try to act different because you are worried about what others will think. But if you are talking about individualism where actions are concerned I think that you need to think of others before yourself. Today's society is so wrapped up in self that families are falling apart and no one helps there neighbors anymore. We have this really elderly lady that lives next door to us and when it snows I am the only one out there helping her. Before I moved in she did it all by herself. This makes me so angry because everyone on our street but us have a snow blower. It would only take them a second to clear her walk but no they do their own and go inside. What is wrong with people? The elderly are the reason why we are here and have the things we do today and they deserve respect and appreciation.
Families fall apart because the husband and wife become selfish and just decide the can't handle it anymore. But do they even try to get along? What about marriage counciling? They don't even try anymore.
Sorry for the rant but come on people!
Both extremes should be avoided.
Total individualism leads to a cold society where depredation, selfhisness, sucess stepping over other people, money and materialism are looked after as "values". The law of the jungle, where the fittest and strongest prevails. The weak, the needed, the poor are ignored. Nietzche's paradise.
The other extreme leads to the negation of the individual. A person is just a wheel of a big machine, that usually is the state. The current phylosophies of marxism looked after an utopia that in practice becomes a hell on Earth. Curiosly, a society where everyone should be equal, the leaders become ego-centered, and the heads of the state, an oligarcy. And in the name of the state, they murder: Stalin killed far more pople than Hitler and Mao killed more than Stalin. Pol-Pot murdered a quarter of the population of Camboya. Castro did his thing, also. Coming next: Chavez.
What fais in both extremes?: I think that it's the thirst of power, and the ignorance of the people.
Everything in moderation, including moderation.
which is pretty much my philosophy on... well, everything.
Extreme order or chaos should be avoid...
We should remain the balance in life...
What balance o.o... we already screwed up the world a lot.
DD
Okay, anyways, yeah. "Balance" is needed, >.>