Is freedom more important than comfort?

>>9821889
According to John Milton, yes.

According to women, no.

>>9821897
>According to someone who lived in comfort, yes

>>9821889
no.
ask your local homeless.
there's a difference between "being a part of society and following the rules of society in exchange for warmth, food and comfort" and "abandoning the self and being subjugated"

Define freedom. Define comfort.

Yes. Comfort breeds apathy and death

>>9821889
you can't be free if your basic necessities aren't met

File: whyefreedomshouldbelimited.jpg (420KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 1920x1280px

>>9822012
freedom: doing what you want to do

comfort: getting the things you want

ok to quibble on the above working definitions, but that should be more than enough to get us started on a debate. the answer, unfortunately, is the same answer that most questions of this sort have: "it depends."

most people seem to have chosen exchanging about 40 hours of their freedom for the houses, food, iphones, music, literature, and availability of sexual partners that modern society provides.

>>9822130
meet them yourself with tooth and claw

>>9821889
Freedom becomes comfort. Natural selection weeds out those unfit to live freely and only those who are able survive. Perfectly adapted to the world they live in over the course of millenia they are equally free and comfortable. Socialism, state nationalism, capitalism and other ideologies that rest on the eternalisation of social constructs like human rights, borders and value hinder this process and catalyse long-term discomfort.

>>9822141
society will put you in prison for breaking the law

>>9822153
Fuck society, fuck the police and fuck modernity

File: _78652520_024494797-1.jpg (50KB, 624x391px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 624x391px

>>9822168
these boys are gonna put you down, kid

>>9822178
why does the guy in the back look like a real life john cena photoshop?

>>9822187
Second one from the left reminds me of Gary Sinese.

>>9821910
Women want to be comforted by a free man, this is the natural way of things

>>9821889
It is. Liberal politicians advocate comfort so they can steal your freedom.

>>9822138
most people seem to have chosen exchanging about 40 hours of their freedom for the houses, food, i-phones etc.
People with nice jobs will agree and shitty jobs will tell you it's not worth it.
Free will is a matter of perspective.

>>9823134
That's stupid. You're an idiot if you actually think that.

>>9821956
ahh but even if one should be free of impediments, and be able to realise one's will, the construction and formulation of that will was not in one's power.

freedom is not opposed to participation in society but made possible by it, as freedom is the capacity not simply to make choices but participation in the formation of categories which determine choices, i.e. participation in politics, a polis, society.

>>9823254
Thanks for the input Schlomo

This is one of those bullshit philosophical questions because both are important in balance, freedom in itself is a form of comfort, comfort is a form of freedom.

If I had to choose one or the other I'd have to choose comfort, based on the way I live my life.

>>9823341
Stupidest post I seen all day, please return to whatever reddit associated site you came from

>>9821889
You need both and there is a trade-off between the two such that utility can be maximized according to specific chosen utility functions.

Overall most people in the developed world today have at least the minimum of both throughout their life.

>>9821910
Women don't need freedom because they don't have to compete for resources.

>>9822138
Dubious definitions there. I'd argue:
freedom: choosing your own destiny, including your own mistakes.
Comfort: Having your material needs provided for in abundance.

When you look at it like that the choice becomes obvious - freedom > comfort.

>>9823254
It's true and everyone knows it.

>>9823341
>muh balance
No. You're either free or you're not.
>freedom in itself is a form of comfort, comfort is a form of freedom.
BRAVO

>>9823475
Cuck

For me comfort. The people suffer very much in his works.

>>9823494
Cuck

File: Fig 1 B F Skinner.jpg (45KB, 306x401px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 306x401px

>>9821889
>anon talks about freedom
>tfw

>>9823458

>No. You're either free or you're not.

You're retarded, nobody is truly free. If somebody was absolutely free they would be god. Absolute freedom is nothing but rudderless chaos no sane person would actually want because we're designed to struggle within certain bounds nature imposes on us.

>>9823189
>people whose lives are enabled by cheap and outsourced labor will agree
Fixed it for you.

>>9824162
How does this change my argument. Greater freedom doesn't imply less comfort and less freedom doesn't imply more comfort. The concepts are completely unrelated so why are they being treated as mutually exclusive?

Isn't comfort freedom from something? What do you mean by "freedom"?

>>9824206
Because sometimes they are

>>9824579
Two things are either mutually exclusive or not. They are not "sometimes" mutually exclusive.

>>9821956
The local homeless are poor, and they're still bound and subjugated by societies laws and regulations and expectations. The primary factor that doesn't make them free is the lack of money, not the lack of a home, the rich have more freedom.

>>9823254
I mean, when are politicians really helping the people over the government -or so it would seem? The few presidents I can think of all have something in common.

spook thread