> The fact is, the very original meaning of 'freedom' included the
> freedoms to discriminate and abuse some "disenfranchised" others.
> The word 'freedom' developed its meaning in contrasting free people
> with unfree people. If one excludes the latter from the context,
> then it's no longer clear what 'freedom' really means.

Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
The officebearer is not free either.
Nor are those traditionally married.

Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.

On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee,
> <news:f2d2906c-e43d-4448...@googlegroups.com>
>
> >> The fact is, the very original meaning of 'freedom' included the
> >> freedoms to discriminate and abuse some "disenfranchised" others.
> >> The word 'freedom' developed its meaning in contrasting free people
> >> with unfree people. If one excludes the latter from the context,
> >> then it's no longer clear what 'freedom' really means.
> >
> > Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
> > Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
> > On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
> > The officebearer is not free either.
> > Nor are those traditionally married.
> >
> > Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
>
> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.

What else is there?

> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.

Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age freedom for comforts and conveniences.

On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> Arindam Banerjee,
> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>
> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
> >>>
> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
> >>
> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
> >
> > What else is there?
> Whether one is free to do something or not.

And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from one's will?
Your operative verb is "do".
Which means, work.
Now work is force times distance from physics.
In short, things must move for work to be done.
Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered locally, there is heat generated.
And this explains violence from riots, etc.

> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
> >
> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.

> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that case.
>
> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and then
> evolved over time up to the present.

As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private property - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as they had no clue about freedom.

Civilisation trades stone age freedoms for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to the levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually supportive systems.

Cheers,
Arindam Banerjee

On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
<banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>> Arindam Banerjee,
>> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
>> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>>
>> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
>> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
>> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
>> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
>> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
>> >>>
>> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
>> >>
>> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
>> >
>> > What else is there?
>> Whether one is free to do something or not.
>
> And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from
> one's will?
> Your operative verb is "do".
> Which means, work.
> Now work is force times distance from physics.
> In short, things must move for work to be done.
> Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference
> between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
> When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered
> locally, there is heat generated.
> And this explains violence from riots, etc.
>
>> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
>> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
>> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
>> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
>> >
>> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
>> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
>> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
>
>> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
>> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
>> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that case.
>>
>> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
>> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and then
>> evolved over time up to the present.
>
> As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to
> confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
> screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age
> freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private property
> - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
> freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as they
> had no clue about freedom.

> Civilisation trades stone age freedoms

Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.

> for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to the
> levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
> supportive systems.

Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.

On Friday, 18 February 2022 at 10:11:18 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> >> Arindam Banerjee,
> >> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> >>
> >> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
> >> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
> >> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
> >> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
> >> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
> >> >>
> >> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
> >> >
> >> > What else is there?
> >> Whether one is free to do something or not.
> >
> > And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from
> > one's will?
> > Your operative verb is "do".
> > Which means, work.
> > Now work is force times distance from physics.
> > In short, things must move for work to be done.
> > Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference
> > between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
> > When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered
> > locally, there is heat generated.
> > And this explains violence from riots, etc.
> >
> >> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
> >> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
> >> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
> >> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
> >> >
> >> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
> >> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
> >> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
> >
> >> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
> >> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
> >> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that case.
> >>
> >> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
> >> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and then
> >> evolved over time up to the present.
> >
> > As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to
> > confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
> > screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age
> > freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private property
> > - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
> > freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as they
> > had no clue about freedom.
>
> > Civilisation trades stone age freedoms
> Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
> whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.

Yes, but that has nothing to do with freedom.
They did not have to report to bosses.

> > for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to the
> > levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
> > supportive systems.
> Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.

Be happy anyway.

On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 17:17:51 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
<banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 18 February 2022 at 10:11:18 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
>> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
>> >> Arindam Banerjee,
>> >> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
>> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
>> >> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
>> >> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
>> >> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
>> >> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
>> >> >
>> >> > What else is there?
>> >> Whether one is free to do something or not.
>> >
>> > And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from
>> > one's will?
>> > Your operative verb is "do".
>> > Which means, work.
>> > Now work is force times distance from physics.
>> > In short, things must move for work to be done.
>> > Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference
>> > between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
>> > When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered
>> > locally, there is heat generated.
>> > And this explains violence from riots, etc.
>> >
>> >> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
>> >> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
>> >> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
>> >> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
>> >> >
>> >> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
>> >> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
>> >> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
>> >
>> >> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
>> >> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
>> >> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that
>> case.
>> >>
>> >> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
>> >> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and
>> then
>> >> evolved over time up to the present.
>> >
>> > As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to
>> > confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
>> > screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age
>> > freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private
>> property
>> > - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
>> > freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as
>> they
>> > had no clue about freedom.
>>
>> > Civilisation trades stone age freedoms
>> Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
>> whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.
>
> Yes, but that has nothing to do with freedom.

They never had any freedom except to die in droughts etc.

> They did not have to report to bosses.

That's wrong too. There were always bosses, even then.

>> > for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to
>> the
>> > levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
>> > supportive systems.

>> Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.
>
> Be happy anyway.

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 05:50:21 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:

Sounds like Rod.

> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 17:17:51 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Friday, 18 February 2022 at 10:11:18 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> >> >> Arindam Banerjee,
> >> >> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
> >> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
> >> >> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
> >> >> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
> >> >> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
> >> >> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > What else is there?
> >> >> Whether one is free to do something or not.
> >> >
> >> > And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from
> >> > one's will?
> >> > Your operative verb is "do".
> >> > Which means, work.
> >> > Now work is force times distance from physics.
> >> > In short, things must move for work to be done.
> >> > Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference
> >> > between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
> >> > When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered
> >> > locally, there is heat generated.
> >> > And this explains violence from riots, etc.
> >> >
> >> >> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
> >> >> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
> >> >> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
> >> >> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
> >> >> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
> >> >> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
> >> >
> >> >> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
> >> >> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
> >> >> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that
> >> case.
> >> >>
> >> >> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
> >> >> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and
> >> then
> >> >> evolved over time up to the present.
> >> >
> >> > As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to
> >> > confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
> >> > screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age
> >> > freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private
> >> property
> >> > - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
> >> > freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as
> >> they
> >> > had no clue about freedom.
> >>
> >> > Civilisation trades stone age freedoms
> >> Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
> >> whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.
> >
> > Yes, but that has nothing to do with freedom.
> They never had any freedom except to die in droughts etc.
They were not slaves nor wage slaves.
Life was not easy so they got civilised.
Tradeoff.
> > They did not have to report to bosses.
> That's wrong too. There were always bosses, even then.
Tribal chiefs were not like civilised bosses.
They did not enforce routine.
> >> > for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to
> >> the
> >> > levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
> >> > supportive systems.
>
> >> Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.
> >
> > Be happy anyway.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 09:15:34 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
<banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 05:50:21 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
>
> Sounds like Rod.
>
>> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 17:17:51 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
>> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Friday, 18 February 2022 at 10:11:18 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
>> >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov
>> wrote:
>> >> >> Arindam Banerjee,
>> >> >> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
>> >> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
>> >> >> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
>> >> >> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
>> >> >> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
>> >> >> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of
>> freedom.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > What else is there?
>> >> >> Whether one is free to do something or not.
>> >> >
>> >> > And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement
>> from
>> >> > one's will?
>> >> > Your operative verb is "do".
>> >> > Which means, work.
>> >> > Now work is force times distance from physics.
>> >> > In short, things must move for work to be done.
>> >> > Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the
>> difference
>> >> > between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
>> >> > When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force
>> countered
>> >> > locally, there is heat generated.
>> >> > And this explains violence from riots, etc.
>> >> >
>> >> >> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social
>> institutions.
>> >> >> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first
>> expressed in
>> >> >> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were
>> clans,
>> >> >> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
>> >> >> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
>> >> >> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
>> >> >
>> >> >> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
>> >> >> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of
>> this
>> >> >> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that
>> >> case.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best
>> way
>> >> >> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and
>> >> then
>> >> >> evolved over time up to the present.
>> >> >
>> >> > As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles
>> to
>> >> > confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
>> >> > screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone
>> age
>> >> > freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private
>> >> property
>> >> > - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
>> >> > freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as
>> >> they
>> >> > had no clue about freedom.
>> >>
>> >> > Civilisation trades stone age freedoms

>> >> Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
>> >> whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.

>> > Yes, but that has nothing to do with freedom.

>> They never had any freedom except to die in droughts etc.

> They were not slaves

Plenty did in fact have slaves.

> nor wage slaves.

Money hadn't been invented yet.

> Life was not easy so they got civilised.

Yep farming and having your own livestock
is a lot easer than hunting and gathering.

> Tradeoff.

>> > They did not have to report to bosses.

>> That's wrong too. There were always bosses, even then.

> Tribal chiefs were not like civilised bosses.

They were still the boss tho.

> They did not enforce routine.

But the witchdooctor and the other cavemen did.

Tribal chiefs did organise tribal warfare and stuff like that and
it was no good saying that you didn't feel like getting involved.

Interesting reading the memoirs of one of those looking for the source
of the Nile, commenting on what the local savages got up to.

>> >> > for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to
>> >> the
>> >> > levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
>> >> > supportive systems.
>>
>> >> Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.
>> >
>> > Be happy anyway.

On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 09:15:36 UTC+11, Arindam Banerjee wrote:
> On Saturday, 19 February 2022 at 05:50:21 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
>
> Sounds like Rod.
Bet it is.
> > On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 17:17:51 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
> > <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Friday, 18 February 2022 at 10:11:18 UTC+11, Jacob Jones wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 09:45:29 +1100, Arindam Banerjee
> > >> <banerjee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 12:18:21 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> > >> >> Arindam Banerjee,
> > >> >> <news:d2aae200-576b-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>
> > >> >> > On Thursday, 17 February 2022 at 05:46:18 UTC+11, Oleg Smirnov
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >>> Freedom means whether one is free to MOVE or not.
> > >> >> >>> Serfs were not free, unlike gypsies, birds, worms, etc.
> > >> >> >>> On the other hand, one is tied down by the chains of office.
> > >> >> >>> The officebearer is not free either.
> > >> >> >>> Nor are those traditionally married.
> > >> >> >>>
> > >> >> >>> Hooliganism is freedom of a sort.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Opportunity to move does not seem the only component of freedom.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > What else is there?
> > >> >> Whether one is free to do something or not.
> > >> >
> > >> > And what good could that be if one cannot move or cause movement from
> > >> > one's will?
> > >> > Your operative verb is "do".
> > >> > Which means, work.
> > >> > Now work is force times distance from physics.
> > >> > In short, things must move for work to be done.
> > >> > Whether that is done through free will or coercion is the difference
> > >> > between stone-age life/benign civilisation or slavery.
> > >> > When there is no distance involved, only the enslaving force countered
> > >> > locally, there is heat generated.
> > >> > And this explains violence from riots, etc.
> > >> >
> > >> >> >> And the office-related issues are linked with social institutions.
> > >> >> >> At the early time, when the idea of freedom was first expressed in
> > >> >> >> language, there were no developed institutions, there were clans,
> > >> >> >> mostly based on kinship, with certain mores and customs.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Idea of freedom is the most well known to stone age people.
> > >> >> > Civilisation that is getting stuck in places trades stone age
> > >> >> > freedom for comforts and conveniences.
> > >> >
> > >> >> Modern life is less primitive, but basics of human nature has not
> > >> >> changed much, and modern people dispute (including the start of this
> > >> >> thread) whether the term 'freedom' is appropriate in this or that
> > >> case.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Many great philosophers wrote about freedom, but I think the best way
> > >> >> to grasp the true meaning is to trace how the word originated and
> > >> then
> > >> >> evolved over time up to the present.
> > >> >
> > >> > As such great philosophers (verbose entities peddling word puzzles to
> > >> > confuse matters) had not much clue about stone age existence - and
> > >> > screwed up like Engels when they did notice something about stone age
> > >> > freedoms that suited their theories such as the bane of private
> > >> property
> > >> > - and did not observe tigers and fish and birds and worms from the
> > >> > freedom perspective, their opinions about freedom have no worth as
> > >> they
> > >> > had no clue about freedom.
> > >>
> > >> > Civilisation trades stone age freedoms
> > >> Stone age freedoms are a myth. The reality is that they were at the
> > >> whim of the weather and had to watch their kids die in droughts etc.
> > >
> > > Yes, but that has nothing to do with freedom.
> > They never had any freedom except to die in droughts etc.
> They were not slaves nor wage slaves.
> Life was not easy so they got civilised.
> Tradeoff.
> > > They did not have to report to bosses.
> > That's wrong too. There were always bosses, even then.
> Tribal chiefs were not like civilised bosses.
> They did not enforce routine.
> > >> > for comforts, conveniences and also security. It limits freedom, to
> > >> the
> > >> > levels allowed, and channels existence to benefit from mutually
> > >> > supportive systems.
> >
> > >> Still very possible to have a lot of freedom in that situation.
> > >
> > > Be happy anyway.