how the govt shud b ran

1. 2015-08-28 at 5:50 AM UTC

   #1
   The Self Taught Man Black Hole
   So i hear all da time bout how we shud run the guvment of science n shit. Like science shud b tha basis 4 all guvment to move us further into the future and avance progression n shite.
   
   N sumtiems I here bout how rulijis ppl shudnt be guverning baised on wut their rulijin preechez.
   
   But i acshully belif that we shuld have philosophers run duh guvment. Like think bout it rite? If philosophers run the guvment we wud have freedum from rulijin but also no cray cray nazi sience xperiments. Itz like duh bast uf both wurlds.
   
   wachu niggas think?
   
2. 2015-08-28 at 9:41 AM UTC

   #2
   

   Sophie Pedophile Tech Support
   Philosopher Kings, i dig it.
3. 2015-08-28 at 12:36 PM UTC

   #3
   The Self Taught Man Black Hole
   I think they would sit around waxing philosophically and get nothing done.
4. 2015-08-30 at 9:47 PM UTC

   #4
   crazy mike Houston

   Philosopher Kings, i dig it.

   
   
   
   I was going to post something close to this.
5. 2015-08-30 at 10 PM UTC

   #5
   

   Lanny Bird of Courage
   So what happens with popular opinion deviates from science or the philosophy of philosopher kings or what have you? Is a philosopher king justified in using the powers of state to enforce their well considered rule?
6. 2015-08-31 at 2:55 AM UTC

   #6
   crazy mike Houston

   So what happens with popular opinion deviates from science or the philosophy of philosopher kings or what have you? Is a philosopher king justified in using the powers of state to enforce their well considered rule?

   
   
   
   off with their heads, of course
7. 2015-08-31 at 3:01 AM UTC

   #7
   

   Lanny Bird of Courage

   off with their heads, of course

   
   So then if the head of state is highly trained and certain that a given piece of policy is appropriate then you support them using coercive force via the state to enforce that policy? Because I'm pretty sure there's a lot of policy you don't support that fits that description.
8. 2015-08-31 at 4:28 AM UTC

   #8
   The Self Taught Man Black Hole
   We aren't talking about coercive force by the state here. We are talking about governing under a philosophical base rather than a strictly religious or scientific one. I'm sure a large portion of the rule would operate under a utilitarian consideration with the moral consideration of how any particular legislation would be carried out.
9. 2015-08-31 at 5:04 PM UTC

   #9
   

   Sophie Pedophile Tech Support

   We aren't talking about coercive force by the state here. We are talking about governing under a philosophical base rather than a strictly religious or scientific one. I'm sure a large portion of the rule would operate under a utilitarian consideration with the moral consideration of how any particular legislation would be carried out.

   
   I think Lanny is asking how you're going to enforce decisions, even if they are morally right.
10. 2015-08-31 at 6:31 PM UTC

    #10
    The Self Taught Man Black Hole
    The same way any government does. That just seems like an odd question in that the way a law is enforced is specific to that law. I.e the police don't come after you if you don't pay taxes and the IRS doesn't come after you if you rob a liquor store.
11. 2015-08-31 at 6:34 PM UTC

    #11
    

    Sophie Pedophile Tech Support

    I.e the police don't come after you if you don't pay taxes.

    
    
    If that were true i'd never pay taxes.
    
    At first, you'll get a letter, then you'll get a court date and if you don't show up you get a bench warrant and then the police come.
12. 2015-08-31 at 6:42 PM UTC

    #12
    The Self Taught Man Black Hole
    But I'm saying the police aren't the first response to that whereas they are first response to crimes like robbery.
13. 2015-08-31 at 10:22 PM UTC

    #13
    crazy mike Houston

    So then if the head of state is highly trained and certain that a given piece of policy is appropriate then you support them using coercive force via the state to enforce that policy? Because I'm pretty sure there's a lot of policy you don't support that fits that description.

    
    
    
    holy fuck lanny, we are discussing philosopher kings, not how great leftism is. chill out on that shit already.
14. 2015-09-02 at 6:41 AM UTC

    #14
    

    Zanick motherfucker [my p.a. supernal goa]
    It's an interesting probe into the problem of authority. The philosopher king, as described by Plato's dialogues, is a supremely wise individual who is (presumably) selected or groomed for his role. A moral being with more information and access to higher-minded ideals should be the most capable in making a decision that effects others, right? We don't know, we're meant to trust that they do, and that's the conundrum with this concept of leadership. It's not like the progressive, righteous shift comes along and the whole world jumps on the boat. Leaders have to defend their choices against an onslaught of naysayers and it gets ugly.
15. 2015-09-02 at 7:19 PM UTC

    #15
    

    -SpectraL coward [the spuriously bluish-lilac bushman]
    Kick out all the lobbyists and ban political contributions altogether. Make it a criminal offense to contribute to any political party, under national security legislature, and then put them in prison if they continue. It's that simple. It won't solve all the corruption, but it will solve a hell of a lot of it.
16. 2015-09-02 at 8:24 PM UTC

    #16
    The Self Taught Man Black Hole
    Ban yourself.