If you ask a liberal, progressive if they will give up free will and they say no, then why would they expect or demand others to give it up? That would be a minimum requirement of a collective.
If they say they will and have given up their free will, then ask them how can they give that answer if they have given up free will? A decision to answer a question can’t made by a person who has no free will. The answer is the answer of the collective not theirs. This is an example of the circular reasoning that produces illogical, disjointed and or unreasonable answers.
A person with no free will has no answers.
2 / 2 LOGICALLY EVERY DECISION REQUIRES THE USE OF FREE WILL.
Hopefully it is your own free will.
Added to Gab. March 30, 2023.
Added to GETTR. March 30, 2023.
Added to Locals. March 30, 2023.
Added to Truth Social. March 30, 2023.
To turn my leering leaching eye to the realm of "Notes", for example "Community Notes" and all other sources of information sometimes also called data either for or not for "checking" or any other purpose such as research. Can there be identified anything that is useless before one's encounter with such note (source)?
Requisite condition: How would one know for themself?
Do I hear it now? What you say?
Self-assigned complication rating: <1>). Or maybe zero.
Point: Everything old is always new to some or many.
SG - Free Thought - [Locals] - [June 2026]
Gab: June 2, 2026.
GETTR: June 2, 2026.
Locals: June 2, 2026.
Truth Social: June 2, 2026.
X: June 2, 2026.
What I am quite but not completely sure of is that I would support not preventing anyone from not doing what they do not want to do. However, in some situations I would not recommend such behavior.
SG - Free Thought - [Locals] - [June 2026]
Gab: June 2, 2026.
GETTR: June 2, 2026.
Locals: June 2, 2026.
Truth Social: June 2, 2026.
X: June 2, 2026.
