What's more important, the community or the individual?

[Datboi65]

I'm running a social experiment to see what people on GAG think should be more prioritized. I will probably make a future post addressing this poll.

For now, what do you believe should come first? Please give your reasons as to why you picked what you picked.

Community

Individual

[stepyo99]

Putting the individual first is just capitalist greed and cynicism. Putting the community first gets you a soulless communist hivemind.

The family is what is most important. The family unit is a group of people with a blood bond who works to lift each other up. Any successful nation will put the family before everything else because it is the smallest divisible unit of any nation. The nation is a collection of families as the family is a collection of individuals. That's how you achieve a synergy between the individual and the group.

[Datboi65]

A family unit is a community. There's a father and a mother with their children. That's a small group, so technically it's a group. Also other than parents, it takes a village to raise a child. I would say environment matters too. You cannot separate the family from the rest because whatever happens outside may also have an impact on the family.

[BoopBoopBeep]

If it takes a village to raise a child why do people always get all butt-hurt when I smack "our" kid?

[stepyo99]

Yes, that's what I'm saying. The family unit is the only form of community that works. And then by extension, a village being a collection of families, a city a collection of villages, a nation a collection of cities. The shared blood ties and the shared culture is what allows that form of community to function without being oppressive or trampling the individual.
Communism erases the individual and reduces everything to a materialist, industrialist grey goo.

[DaveJord]

What a thought-provoking question... like seriously you want to say community. But don't we always more or less prioritize our own needs and wants first.

So this comes down to if you believe the purpose of "community" is to promote individualism or collectivism. Socialism, fascism and communism or capitalism, libertarianism or democratism.

Do you place greater value on Social Contract Theory or Natural Rights Theory.

[Datboi65]

So the way I look at it, I believe humans are social creatures. The reason we were able to create vast structures and great civilizations is due to our ability to work together to do what's best for the group. Of course with that, there has to be a code of conduct that the group should abide by. That's how we became civilized.

I would admit I am somewhat conservative in the sense that I do not believe in absolute freedom of the individual if that can negatively affect the group regardless of whether its done directly or indirectly.

For example, drinking is legal. An alcoholic may not necessarily hurt others directly, they are more likely to hurt themselves. However, alcohol addiction can ruin families and cause a great amount of pain on immediate relatives, dependants and friends that might have a domino effect on the rest. Alcohol poisoning is deadly, and chronic alcoholism has a wide variety of diseases and cancers that are hard to treat with modern medicine. Just because something might be legal doesn't make it moral, and just because it does not directly affect others doesn't mean it won't indirectly have a negative impact on the rest.

[DaveJord]

So your all about social contract theory then?

Personally, the probation of alcohol created organized crime, the mob and mass shootings... and then it was easily converted into the drug trade. All because do Gooders thought it best to put more limitation on personal freedoms and choice in the name of community.

This concept of community... can be just as dangerous as no community. For me government and community should be aimed at protecting individuals right and their ability to choose at all costs.

[Jessica405]

Community comes first. In a democracy, everything should be for the benefit of the majority. Ya can't often please everyone, so go for the majority.

[Datboi65]

Then, do you believe things like personal choice and freedom to do everything as long as it doesn't directly harm others and is legal matter more over protecting the social fabric, or do you think that the opposite is true?

Just so I'm not misunderstood, I'm referring to things that may be frowned upon socially but are legal and don't directly hurt the next person if it makes sense.

[Jessica405]

As a Pagan, we have one rule. If it harm none, do what thou will. This "none" includes people, animals, things someone has made, and anything else. Of course, it must be legal.

[BoopBoopBeep]

Jefferson warned of the tyranny of democracy for a reason

[Datboi65]

I guess by that definition I'm inclined to think that you are more individually driven. Nothing wrong with that, it's just what I understood from your response.

If I asked you if you believe in freedom of speech absolutism or do you think certain language should be banned like slurs because they can provoke a strong response from some people, what would be your answer?

A) These people should just deal with it and grow some thicker skin, freedom of speech should stay and my rights are more important than their feelings

B) Provoking other people for no reason by using such language should have consequences so that that behavior does not continue again

[BoopBoopBeep]

A. hands down. I've been on the receiving end of some really hateful speech. i will always support their right to give me more.

[mandyfire98]

It's interesting that so far women have shown to be more community minded and men are more focused on themselves. So far anyway.

[Datboi65]

I would agree with you that I'm somewhat surprised as well since individualism is used to justify a lot of the modern developments that men typically criticize. However, it could may be a sign that modern day men just don't care anymore.

[inhua]

due to the numbers, the community would take priority over the individual

one angry individual is nothing compared to many angry individuals however this can be problematic because anyone within a community could be that neglected individual

sometimes so many individuals get neglected, it becomes a community and that community as a whole gets neglected and this is where problems arise

[Sparkie460]

I'm in the service industry so my community comes first before my needs. When they call I'm out the door regardless of what I'm doing

[BoopBoopBeep]

The community doesn't pay my mortgage or feed my family.

[OddBeMe]

We all should value ourselves more than anything else. But our community should be a very close second, as that protects “us”. Ie…vaccines.

[SaoirseS]

Neither, the two are inseparable.

[Datboi65]

The two are connected, but not inseparable. It all depends on how you look at it. Some people believe in absolute freedom as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights of others, other people believe that somethings are just unacceptable and can have a bigger impact on society as a whole even if they were legal.

One example is gambling. You ask someone what they think of gambling and sport bets for example and you will have some folks tell you that it's harmless, while others will tell you that it causes addiction and wrecks homes over financial mismanagement. The first type is an individualist and the second type is more community-oriented. You're either one or the other, there's usually no in between. The question is which one are you?

[SaoirseS]

By both nature and profession, I'm more community-oriented. But that doesn't mean I agree one is more important than the other. Community matters, so do individuals.

[Hispanic-Cool-Guy]

Both are equally important I think.

Individuality gives a person their own identity and community a sense of care for each other.

[exitseven]

Without the individual there is no community.

[UniquelyBasic]

I should be prioritized