Go to Discombobulated's Poetry
- Add a comment
- Go to Okay so this post isn’t a poem either!
Bhaskar
Yes I have, I've read many of his books. Overall I'm moving away from Robert Kiyosaki's investor/business-driven model of independence but I certainly look after my own finances a lot better since reading his books. But I'm no entrepreneur and don't want to force myself (square peg) into that round hole.
posted by
Discombobulated78
on February 24, 2007 at 10:59 PM
| link to this | reply
Discombobulated
"The more secure a person is, the less free they are. This is not such a simple statement", just as the Q you pose this time. Kiyosaki is best known for his book
Rich Dad, Poor Dad. He was an investot and businessman. Have you come across his Cash Quadrant flow?
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on February 24, 2007 at 10:40 PM
| link to this | reply
OneTimeAgain, that's definitely a kind of freedom
And arguably, the only type of pure freedom humans can experience. The only problem I have with this type of freedom is that it is *purely* experiential, purely in the head. It reminds me a little too much of a person giggling in the corner of a padded cell, sitting in a straight jacket. Do they know they're in a tiny padded cell and couldn't get out if they tried?
I wonder also, if responsibility, taken to its furthest conclusion, which then results in a high level of independence and mastery over one's resources, and destiny, is another form of freedom. Responsibility is usually put forth as the opposite of freedom but for adults, there seems to be a very different kind of freedom than the kind experienced by children. I'm thinking of what taxguy said, that as children we are free from worries. There are so many levels of freedom, different ways to define it, depending on circumstance.
To me, a person who is highly-skilled, recognized as a leader in their field, sought out as a source of wisdom, and has a reasonable degree of lattitude and flexibility in their life, I would see that as being quite free, though they would defintely have responsibilities. You could take two people, put them both into that similar sort of situation and maybe one would feel overwhelmed with what is expected of them, it would be a weight on their shoulders, and maybe another would flourish under the stimulation and expand even further as a person. I would think the difference between the two people is self-confidence and maturity. But maybe I'm going off on a tangent here....
posted by
Discombobulated78
on February 24, 2007 at 7:22 PM
| link to this | reply
I agree with your opinion.
posted by
afzal50
on February 24, 2007 at 5:36 PM
| link to this | reply
Dis
I always think of the movie Shawshank Redemption when the question of freedom comes around. Tim Robbins character, Andy Dufresne locks himself in a room and plays opera over a prison intercom system. The look on his face. The smile on his face ..the place his soul went while smiling and ignoring the guards of the physical prison trying to stop him.. that seemed freedom to me.
posted by
Blue_feathers
on February 24, 2007 at 3:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Too right taxguy
Your comment reminds me of an idiot friend I had back in high school (needless to say we're not friends anymore). The second she turned 18 she started spouting to her mom, "I'm 18 now I can do what I want!" Even back then in my teenager-ish state I knew that was ridiculous.
I don't remember being free of worry when I was a kid (because I was constantly worried about being picked on at school), but yes, kid worries are completely different from adult worries.
posted by
Discombobulated78
on February 24, 2007 at 2:59 PM
| link to this | reply
You're Right
When we are young, we are free from worry but not free to do as we please. As we get older, we are free to do what we want, but this is not the equivalent of being free from resonsibility.
posted by
taxguy
on February 24, 2007 at 2:53 PM
| link to this | reply
Tony
A lot of truth in what you said, and I would've tended to agree with you but maybe it is experienced in moments. Can there be an objective definition that is also attainable?
posted by
Discombobulated78
on February 24, 2007 at 2:39 PM
| link to this | reply
rihwik
I like your take on it, that it's purely subjective. Not a state one can reach and stay there (as in, I am now free). It's something you experience at various moments.
posted by
Discombobulated78
on February 24, 2007 at 2:30 PM
| link to this | reply
Discom - good question to raise, indeed.
Personally, my take on it is that we are never free in any sense. Free in a democracy? No, because we are still heavily restricted as to what we can do. Also, we might not have voted for the winning political policies and we have therefore not been listened to and have had no say in those policies. Outside of politics, again we are not free, because we know we will die ( a pretty serious curb on freedom if ever there was one, unless you take the view that death IS freedom, which it is in many ways); because we cannot control other people and how they behave; because we cannot stop injustice and crime; because we have to pay for things we should not have to pay for, and if we don't have enough money, we can't have them while those with more money can, however they obtained their money; because we have to make decisions each moment which we can't undo and which can affect the entire course of our life for good or ill from then on, etc. I'm sure i could say more, but at least there are a few reasons why we are not free. But we are partially free in some ways - just not completely free.
posted by
Antonionioni
on February 24, 2007 at 2:16 PM
| link to this | reply
comment
freedom is something one experiences.it is purely subjective.one's freedom can be another's slavery.for smoothness of life a lot of restrictions are in place,from lover,family,society and even nature.the desire matters to great extent.
rithwik
posted by
rihwik.lancs
on February 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM
| link to this | reply