Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Technosoul · Aug 9, 2004, 03:18 pm

When you walk down the street you use your own eyes to direct your self so that you do not walk off a cliff or something.

Do your naked eyes have real authority to do that? Or should you get a better expert to guide you along the street?

Is not all your persepctives and opinions not unlike those naked eyes, a way to see how to live your life and to plot your course of action?

Should we not trust that authority of our on reason and perspective as being the authority which is the most dependable of our personal pathway in life?

Or should we look up each step on a roadmap or in a book?

If you do not trust your self how can you trust anyone else or any other authority?

What is your philosophy about authority? Should you be in charge or someone or something else?

Technosoul.

Vecsus · Aug 9, 2004, 09:38 pm

all situational. If I'm going to have a cavity filled then I allow the dentist to be the authority. I'll let him tell me when to open my mouth, when to spit, etc. But when I'm taking a shower I'm the sole authority on how to shampoo my hair and clean between my toes. No one can be their own full-time authority. Nor can anyone fully surrender authority all the time.

Technosoul · Aug 10, 2004, 01:14 am

Thank you for your in-put, it seems you gave a pretty stright foreward of an answer to my question about auhtority. At first glance I thought that is logical and non-debatable (the idea that authority is all situatinal) would certainly ring the bells of truth in our ears.

However is it really the circumstances or that fact that you failed to be an authority on tooth repair work? While you feel comfortable in your knowledge about using hair shampoo. (I am exploreing this a little deeper then just an easy surface answer could solve}.

Needless to say if you are in fact not an authority on some topic then you would have to depend upon someone else as your authority.
However does this mean you should not have been your own authority concerning that problem even if you willingly paid someone else to solve the dental problem for you?

Also is cooperating with others the same thing as following orders?

tech.

dalin · Aug 12, 2004, 10:33 am

I'd say yes to your last comment. Society is premised on its members tacitly (or explicitly) following some order. However there's a mutual benefit in that as you are subject to others' authority, they are to yours (so long as all act in the bounds of the societal norms).

No one can be an authority on all subjects. That's the point of society.

katar · Aug 12, 2004, 02:57 pm

Without establishing a meaning of "authority", this discussion gets pretty ambiguous.

To me, authority means 'justified power to act'. If that is the case, then a dentist has no authority unless it is granted by the patient for limited purposes. Absent a transfer of authority, the dentist has none; the dentist can't force you to get a filling when you don't want one, and you have to sign consent forms to get surgery.

Similarly, on a societal level, the citizens implicitly grant authority to the government structure to regulate certain agreed acts through enforcement of rules (laws). Agreement is symbolized by living within the borders and paying taxes. This of course is detailed in the various social contract theories. However, in all of those theories the authority derives from the individual and is then granted to the govt under the terms of the social contract.

As Dalin stated, individuals surrender this authority to the state for mutual benefit---- the state will protect them by enforcing the agreed rules.

So to answer the original question-- i think an individual retains authority until the individual chooses to grant it to another. Hiring a tour guide is an example. Submitting to the social contract is another.

Technosoul · Aug 12, 2004, 07:35 pm

Now let us put it in a religious context. Did Jesus have the authority break the established rules of his culture because his individual opinions were granted authority over the collective opinions of his day, time, and place?

Is God the only authority and is any other authority simply stealing the thunder, so to speak?

And is their a authority that is self-evident based on the facts relative to the moment at hand, that might override our general rule of thumb as outlined in written laws or majority agreements.

Example: Let us say we had a law that indecent exposure of your private part in public (nudity) is punishable by law (it is not unless someone finds it objectionable). But let us say we had such a law where no exceptions were made. Now you are taking a bath and the house is on fire and so you jump out the bathroom window naked. Here you did the right thing based on the "authority of the moment" but you are still in violation of the law and it's authority which authority is such due to enforcement - if no exceptions can be made for breaking the law.

And if laws have unknown exceptions and are in need of interpretions on a case by case bases then how can we live by such a flip flopping type of authority?

Technosoul.

Aug 12, 2004, 02:57 pm	#5 (permalink) (top)
katar Molten Ash Location: L.A. or Portland Posts: 99	Without establishing a meaning of "authority", this discussion gets pretty ambiguous. To me, authority means 'justified power to act'. If that is the case, then a dentist has no authority unless it is granted by the patient for limited purposes. Absent a transfer of authority, the dentist has none; the dentist can't force you to get a filling when you don't want one, and you have to sign consent forms to get surgery. Similarly, on a societal level, the citizens implicitly grant authority to the government structure to regulate certain agreed acts through enforcement of rules (laws). Agreement is symbolized by living within the borders and paying taxes. This of course is detailed in the various social contract theories. However, in all of those theories the authority derives from the individual and is then granted to the govt under the terms of the social contract. As Dalin stated, individuals surrender this authority to the state for mutual benefit---- the state will protect them by enforcing the agreed rules. So to answer the original question-- i think an individual retains authority until the individual chooses to grant it to another. Hiring a tour guide is an example. Submitting to the social contract is another. http://www.volconvo.com/forums/showpost.php?p=64897&postcount=95

Aug 9, 2004, 03:18 pm	#1 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	When you walk down the street you use your own eyes to direct your self so that you do not walk off a cliff or something. Do your naked eyes have real authority to do that? Or should you get a better expert to guide you along the street? Is not all your persepctives and opinions not unlike those naked eyes, a way to see how to live your life and to plot your course of action? Should we not trust that authority of our on reason and perspective as being the authority which is the most dependable of our personal pathway in life? Or should we look up each step on a roadmap or in a book? If you do not trust your self how can you trust anyone else or any other authority? What is your philosophy about authority? Should you be in charge or someone or something else? Technosoul.

Aug 9, 2004, 09:38 pm	#2 (permalink) (top)
Vecsus Sedimentary Rock Posts: 3	all situational. If I'm going to have a cavity filled then I allow the dentist to be the authority. I'll let him tell me when to open my mouth, when to spit, etc. But when I'm taking a shower I'm the sole authority on how to shampoo my hair and clean between my toes. No one can be their own full-time authority. Nor can anyone fully surrender authority all the time.

Aug 10, 2004, 01:14 am	#3 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	Thank you for your in-put, it seems you gave a pretty stright foreward of an answer to my question about auhtority. At first glance I thought that is logical and non-debatable (the idea that authority is all situatinal) would certainly ring the bells of truth in our ears. However is it really the circumstances or that fact that you failed to be an authority on tooth repair work? While you feel comfortable in your knowledge about using hair shampoo. (I am exploreing this a little deeper then just an easy surface answer could solve}. Needless to say if you are in fact not an authority on some topic then you would have to depend upon someone else as your authority. However does this mean you should not have been your own authority concerning that problem even if you willingly paid someone else to solve the dental problem for you? Also is cooperating with others the same thing as following orders? tech.

Aug 12, 2004, 10:33 am	#4 (permalink) (top)
dalin Molten Ash Posts: 118	I'd say yes to your last comment. Society is premised on its members tacitly (or explicitly) following some order. However there's a mutual benefit in that as you are subject to others' authority, they are to yours (so long as all act in the bounds of the societal norms). No one can be an authority on all subjects. That's the point of society.

Aug 12, 2004, 07:35 pm	#6 (permalink) (top)
Technosoul Volcanic Erupter Posts: 8,663	Now let us put it in a religious context. Did Jesus have the authority break the established rules of his culture because his individual opinions were granted authority over the collective opinions of his day, time, and place? Is God the only authority and is any other authority simply stealing the thunder, so to speak? And is their a authority that is self-evident based on the facts relative to the moment at hand, that might override our general rule of thumb as outlined in written laws or majority agreements. Example: Let us say we had a law that indecent exposure of your private part in public (nudity) is punishable by law (it is not unless someone finds it objectionable). But let us say we had such a law where no exceptions were made. Now you are taking a bath and the house is on fire and so you jump out the bathroom window naked. Here you did the right thing based on the "authority of the moment" but you are still in violation of the law and it's authority which authority is such due to enforcement - if no exceptions can be made for breaking the law. And if laws have unknown exceptions and are in need of interpretions on a case by case bases then how can we live by such a flip flopping type of authority? Technosoul.