dimreepr

Who sets the rules? For instance, if I was dying of thirst and broke into your home to drink from the tap, in some countries you would be within your rights to shoot me when I turn round, before I have a chance to apologise and offer to pay for the damages.

It's the people that decide what is original, that set the value of a painting; it costs me nothing to own a copy of his work. But in Banksy's case it's a team of people, that verify every peace of graffiti that appears on a wall, in a public place; the disappointment of those that saw a good peace of graffiti in their neighbourhood, only to find out it was only a local toe-rag that was inspired by him... 😣

What metric are you going to use in order to objectify one's freedom, and make it universally true?

There's a band new dance but I don't know it's name

The copies look the same, the value is in the providence, a contiguous story that is dictated by a historian; not the artist,,,

It's the antipode of supply and demand, I've seen the Rhino unsolicited and if I want it on my wall I've just got to copy and paste. The artworld has to manufacture it's uniqueness in order to dupe the plebs that think eating at a starred restaurant will taste so much better, bc a famous person got paid to say it does.

Unless, by freedom, you mean free-will, then I have indeed answered your question. There is no univesal, objective freedom; even within a single culture, at whatever scale you look, there are different levels of freedom available to each individual e.g. a child has very limited freedom when compared to a parent, and each individual will view their levels of freedom with differing levels of satisfaction. And we're back to your moral standards and the containment/restrictions, presumably, of the people who you consider are not doing things correctly.

Not all languages are defined by a noun, that would be very confusing...

In recent news here in blighty, A Banksy has been defiled by a tagger in a mask caught on camera; the Twittersphere is all of a twitter, which could have added value if it hadn't been bought by someone who didn't understand the art...

Are you sure about that? Modern is just a re-examination of dogmatic beliefs, Christianity doesn't need a god to work; in the right context...

You need to be more specific: Trauma can cause post traumatic stress disorder, which causes people suffering, bc they know what is real...

I don't know about mini me, their arsholery seems roughly equivalent; that of 'Cartman' (from south park) an 8 year old mummies boy, with a devious mind. They're are but pigmies when compared to the statesmanship of Nixon. 😉

There used to be witches, why not call her Karen?

He's not here to ask but, I think, more importantly his answers to the question wasn't to a confidante, and so were filled with political niceties/necessities. IOW, Was Einstein a Christian? is a question between him and his god...

Your not the only one that thinks that, this debate is well worth a listen.

Ok let's go back to the start, your OP in my view isn't a problem, it's a question. This is my first post: In what way does this not answer your question? I want to understand you, but that doesn't just happen bc we text the same language, we need a mutual experience to set the stage for the 'story/play/theater' to happen on.

I've found a reasonable work around, before you leave the site to gather information, highlight a word and click the link button; it mostly, work's.

Perhaps, but right back atcha. My point is, money is not a measure of arseholery, it just looks like it is, bc of this western drive to the bottom of the pile; reducing taxes is the mantra of the uber-arsehole. I think your target is wrong...

Bolded mine, indeed but it's not a problem for morality either, so what is the problem? Ethically, doing wrong is a double edged sword; for instance, a rich man is morally obliged to provide employment or alms to the poor, so they aren't put in a position where they're forced to break the moral convention.

Building a wall is kinda the playbook of the fascist's, climbing the wall is all I can do to stop them... 😉

I think, you don't understand the numbers...

Bc they don't understand why getting the highest number is a problem for other's, but only arseholes understand why and do it anyway, and that's got nothing to do with money...

So the problem/question is, what would you do if you're hungry enough or alone enough or etc. to step over what you now consider to be a moral line/imperative? Not really a problem you can intellectually investigate, it's more of a physical examination of one's price...

Which one of us is claiming to be religious?

I'm not trying to be superior, I'm trying to find out what the actual problem is; I doubt even a diety could understand his imagination...