| ▲ | BeetleB 2 hours ago | |||||||
> I don't think it's condescending to believe a large number of people mostly cannot design their lives. At best they can try to make it better for their children, if at all. If they have children, barring some violent circumstances, then they've already participated in designing their life. This is not a binary issue. All of us have choices and make decisions (feeding family, paying rent, not robbing a bank - all of these are choices). Yes, people in privileged positions have a much larger "choice space". And yes, plenty of underprivileged folks simply refuse to pursue the choices they have. Both these things can be true. But sure - no one is denying that some folks exist who, either due to their own design or otherwise (e.g. health issues), may be stuck and their agency is significantly diminished. | ||||||||
| ▲ | the_af an hour ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> If they have children, barring some violent circumstances, then they've already participated in designing their life. This is not the kind of design we're discussing here; "not having children" is usually a privileged, informed decision which most people are not in a position to make. It's certainly very far from "designing your career". Regardless, a lot of people don't have much choice here either, through a system conspiring on denying them choices (see: anti-abortion and anti-sex education lobbies, a health care system that conspires against their free time and energy, etc). There's an illusion of choice, especially to us pontificating from our privileged lives, but no real choice. > But sure - no one is denying that some folks exist [...] their agency is significantly diminished. Most folk, not some. | ||||||||
| ||||||||