The debate "The success of an individual should be the responsibility of the individual. not of the society" was started by
July 12, 2015, 1:42 am.
28 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 1 person is on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
I_Voyager posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
posted the first argument on this debate as an agreeing part.
jonatron5, Mathew, akram, toughgamerjerry, PsychDave, ScreamingEagle, I_Voyager, Turtle, Vander, Bodaciouslady16, Girl101, sabrina, AstroSpace, Skeetc15, sidhant, Max and 12 visitors agree.
Eeeeh... Think about how many instances in which this doesn't work. For example, a CEO of a retail chain is dependent on society for his success. We wouldn't say "He attracted no customers and relied on no employees, but he ran a successful retail chain."
I get that you're trying to point out that welfare and bailouts aren't ideal. People should be able to do X on their own. But "should" in relation to "people" or "society" is dependent on a good definition of "people" and "society". We should live in a utopia. We don't live in a utopia. It's magical to think "It's just because people made the wrong decisions. They could just choose to make the right decisions." I choose a more materialist world view. Things are the way they are necessarily because they are rooted in the facts of the past. The past is the basis for the present so we should only expect what occurs to occur. To change anything requires foresight. Nothing changes spontaneously, everything changes logically in accord with its position in space and its momentum.
If you want to change the world you begin by changing yourself, and then informing others about how to change. You set goals over long-time. Expect changes to occur over years and decades. Do it strategically, by knowing the mechanism and accounting for it. I believe in social mechanics. No mechanics is anything except specific.