Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Human nature

tiberry · 10-08-2004, 01:17 AM

Well then. I'll first say that I'm thoroughly impressed with your "Philosophical Law" approach, in that you cite several "precedents" and authors to describe and reinforce your points. Not trying to demean or discredit you, but rather say that you're not (in my opinion) seeing the forest for the trees -

I'm saying simply that: Human society is founded on the principals of leadership; that is - someone has to be in charge. Take a small group of people...by group I mean more than 1. Give the 'group' a problem. More likely than not, there will be a difference of opinion as to how to solve that problem. In fact, as the group gets larger I'd say it reasonable to expect that the number of potential opinions will increase as well. Without a means to decide for the group what the best course of action is, it is impossible for the group to remain intact as an organization. The methodology of how the ultimate decision is arrived at is irrelavent...democracy (voting) totalitarian, whatever. Even in the case of a democratic decision, someone has to preside over the process as a leader to decide that this in-fact the right way to decide, and if nothing else, to count the votes.

Once we go through this exercise once, the expectation of every member of the group is that we'll use it again- thereby absolving each individual of their "individual" responsiblity, and placing it in the hands of their leader.

Follow me?

10-08-2004, 01:17 AM	#16 (permalink)
tiberry Insane Location: Location, Location!	Well then. I'll first say that I'm thoroughly impressed with your "Philosophical Law" approach, in that you cite several "precedents" and authors to describe and reinforce your points. Not trying to demean or discredit you, but rather say that you're not (in my opinion) seeing the forest for the trees - I'm saying simply that: Human society is founded on the principals of leadership; that is - someone has to be in charge. Take a small group of people...by group I mean more than 1. Give the 'group' a problem. More likely than not, there will be a difference of opinion as to how to solve that problem. In fact, as the group gets larger I'd say it reasonable to expect that the number of potential opinions will increase as well. Without a means to decide for the group what the best course of action is, it is impossible for the group to remain intact as an organization. The methodology of how the ultimate decision is arrived at is irrelavent...democracy (voting) totalitarian, whatever. Even in the case of a democratic decision, someone has to preside over the process as a leader to decide that this in-fact the right way to decide, and if nothing else, to count the votes. Once we go through this exercise once, the expectation of every member of the group is that we'll use it again- thereby absolving each individual of their "individual" responsiblity, and placing it in the hands of their leader. Follow me? __________________ My life's work is to bridge the gap between that which is perceived by the mind and that which is quantifiable by words and numbers.