• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should knowledge be free?

Should information be free?

  • All information should be free (i.e. paid for with tax dollars)

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • People should be able to vote regarding what types of information should be free

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 3. Only info related to social sciences and human biology/medicine should be free to the public

    Votes: 2 25.0%

  • No information should be free unless the publisher/owner allows it

    Votes: 5 62.5%

  • Everyone should have to pay for all types of information

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    8
M

MusicAdventurer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2011
Messages
1,034
Reaction score
268
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
This poll and discussion forum is in response to the recent SOPA and PIPA issue (see below for a quote from wikipedia):
SOPA and PIPA would put the burden on website owners to police user-contributed material and call for the unnecessary blocking of entire sites. Small sites won't have sufficient resources to defend themselves. Big media companies may seek to cut off funding sources for their foreign competitors, even if copyright isn't being infringed. Foreign sites will be blacklisted, which means they won't show up in major search engines. SOPA and PIPA would build a framework for future restrictions and suppression.
In a world in which politicians regulate the Internet based on the influence of big money, Wikipedia — and sites like it — cannot survive.
Congress says it's trying to protect the rights of copyright owners, but the "cure" that SOPA and PIPA represent is worse than the disease. SOPA and PIPA are not the answer: they would fatally damage the free and open Internet.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

for more info visit this site:

SOPA and PIPA - Learn more - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To broaden this issue, should all information be free to citizens, or only certain types of information?

For example, social science type information, i.e. psychological, sociological, political science, social work, etc., and medical articles (research related etc.) are often not available to citizens without a charge. Much of this information could be used by the general public in order to inform better public policy, however, most citizens have to pay to view the info. Should part of our taxes go toward freeing up this type of information for the general public? Should only those who can afford it, be allowed to know critical information such as this? Or should we keep citizens uneducated? Would this even make a difference? What kinds of limits (if any) should be placed on how educated we allow our citizens to become without charge? Is it democratic to keep citizens ignorant, thus limiting their ability to make educated votes? Why or why not?
 
Absolutely not. I would prefer to institute limits as to what is absolutely available for free, and allow content providers to make the choice as to what should be free. Providers of wisdom and their contributors should not be forced to give their wisdom or skills without suitable material compensation. The transmission of political terminology into the academic sphere should be exercised with caution. Just because something is democratic does not mean it is superior. If you were to supply me with a label, I am utterly fine with being called a believer in keeping the aristocratic line for scholarship afloat against the sometimes demeaning tendencies of radical mass democrats.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
Absolutely not. I would prefer to institute limits as to what is absolutely available for free, and allow content providers to make the choice as to what should be free. Providers of wisdom and their contributors should not be forced to give their wisdom or skills without suitable material compensation. The transmission of political terminology into the academic sphere should be exercised with caution. Just because something is democratic does not mean it is superior. If you were to supply me with a label, I am utterly fine with being called a believer in keeping the aristocratic line for scholarship afloat against the sometimes demeaning tendencies of radical mass democrats.
Click to expand...

So what option did you pick? Or which would be closest to what you believe? Do you believe we should have informed or ignorant voters?
 
Last edited:
That's all we need is more ignorant people who can't afford any knowledge. Hell you can't pound it into some peoples heads, more less give it away.
 
Last edited:
grip said:
That's all we need is more ignorant people who can't afford any knowledge. Hell you can't pound into some peoples heads more less give it away.
Click to expand...

So what option did you pick? Or which would be closest to what you believe? Do you believe we should have informed or ignorant voters?
 
MusicAdventurer said:
This poll and discussion forum is in response to the recent SOPA and PIPA issue (see below for a quote from wikipedia):


Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

for more info visit this site:

SOPA and PIPA - Learn more - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To broaden this issue, should all information be free to citizens, or only certain types of information?

For example, social science type information, i.e. psychological, sociological, political science, social work, etc., and medical articles (research related etc.) are often not available to citizens without a charge. Much of this information could be used by the general public in order to inform better public policy, however, most citizens have to pay to view the info. Should part of our taxes go toward freeing up this type of information for the general public? Should only those who can afford it, be allowed to know critical information such as this? Or should we keep citizens uneducated? Would this even make a difference? What kinds of limits (if any) should be placed on how educated we allow our citizens to become without charge? Is it democratic to keep citizens ignorant, thus limiting their ability to make educated votes? Why or why not?
Click to expand...

Why do we need our taxes to subsidize the flow of information? The people who should decide whether the information is free or not are the ones who put up the websites that provide it. Want me to be a member and pay for access? I may. I may not. But once I get there, as long as I have a copy/paste on my computer, I'll move that information anywhere I please. Don't want me to do that? Encrypt the copy...I'm sure there's a way to do that. In fact, I know there is as I've run into it every once in a while.
 
MusicAdventurer said:
So what option did you pick? Or which would be closest to what you believe? Do you believe we should have informed or ignorant voters?
Click to expand...

Knowledge is never "free"; it has to be acquired. What I mean is that it's not gained passively. Those who wish to become better informed have options, including libraries and cybraries, but as already been observed, you can't pound it into some folks' heads or even give it away for free.
 
MusicAdventurer said:
So what option did you pick? Or which would be closest to what you believe? Do you believe we should have informed or ignorant voters?
Click to expand...

Most information should be free. It won't make dumb people smart but it'll definitely help the uneducated. Realistically, I already pay the cable company for my ISP and who knows how many advertisers. There's personal and security information that shouldn't be accessed and some could be paid for it's just to engrossing a question to answer easily. I'd leave Wiki and most current sources free if that's the point?
 
MaggieD said:
Why do we need our taxes to subsidize the flow of information?
Click to expand...

You make a good point, my position is that any information that could allow citizens to make better public policy decisions, should be free. What I mean by this is that academic articles that apply should be free. I believe that college should be free. I believe that receiving a degree should be based only on one's academic achievements, not one's financial inheritance. I believe this because this would be true equal opportunity. I believe in equal opportunity.

MaggieD said:
The people who should decide whether the information is free or not are the ones who put up the websites that provide it. Want me to be a member and pay for access? I may. I may not. But once I get there, as long as I have a copy/paste on my computer, I'll move that information anywhere I please. Don't want me to do that? Encrypt the copy...I'm sure there's a way to do that. In fact, I know there is as I've run into it every once in a while.
Click to expand...

So what option did you pick? Or which would be closest to what you believe? Do you believe we should have informed or ignorant voters? Do you believe in democracy?
 
nota bene said:
Knowledge is never "free"; it has to be acquired. What I mean is that it's not gained passively. Those who wish to become better informed have options, including libraries and cybraries, but as already been observed, you can't pound it into some folks' heads or even give it away for free.
Click to expand...

OK, maybe I have missed something there ... are you saying that all scientific articles are available through any public library?
 
Knowledge cannot be purchased, only information can.

That said, information should be priced no differently than any other commodity on the market. If someone wishes to provide it for "free" then so be it. If someone wants to charge for it then that is their prerogative as well.
 
grip said:
Most information should be free. It won't make dumb people smart but it'll definitely help the uneducated. Realistically, I already pay the cable company for my ISP and who knows how many advertisers. There's personal and security information that shouldn't be accessed and some could be paid for it's just to engrossing a question to answer easily. I'd leave Wiki and most current sources free if that's the point?
Click to expand...

I agree, wiki and most current sources should be free.

I suppose that I am posing a related question - mainly, should education and the access to education be free? To take it a step further ... do you believe in equal opportunity and that equal opportunity means everyone should have access to a college education and any degree based solely on their academic performance and not simply how much tuition they are able to pay? I the college/degree piece takes it in a different (yet related) direction, but I think both are reported .. hmm... perhaps I should start another post....

I see one issue as being related to making an effort to allow voters to be as educated as possible (this is the issue I was referring to in the OP)

The other issue is (the college/degree issue) is related to equal opportunity (this issue is not really what I was originally posting about though)
 
Almost forgot to add that this poll is misguided. Information should not be regulated by the government. In fact, I cannot really think of anything more dangerous to liberty than this sort of regulation...
 
TNAR said:
Knowledge cannot be purchased, only information can.

That said, information should be priced no differently than any other commodity on the market. If someone wishes to provide it for "free" then so be it. If someone wants to charge for it then that is their prerogative as well.
Click to expand...

Right ... but what if some information, particularly information that could allow citizens to make better public policy decisions, were made available to all citizens because our taxes would cover any costs "owners" of such information want to apply
 
TNAR said:
Almost forgot to add that this poll is misguided. Information should not be regulated by the government. In fact, I cannot really think of anything more dangerous to liberty than this sort of regulation...
Click to expand...

Perhaps you do not understand the poll?

Let me ask you this ... if acquiring certain information made it so that citizens could make better public policy decisions, should that information only be shared with people who could afford buying that information? Or should that information be paid for by taxes? Or should some other method of payment be given to owners of such information?
 
MusicAdventurer said:
I agree, wiki and most current sources should be free.

I suppose that I am posing a related question - mainly, should education and the access to education be free? To take it a step further ... do you believe in equal opportunity and that equal opportunity means everyone should have access to a college education and any degree based solely on their academic performance and not simply how much tuition they are able to pay? I the college/degree piece takes it in a different (yet related) direction, but I think both are reported .. hmm... perhaps I should start another post....

I see one issue as being related to making an effort to allow voters to be as educated as possible (this is the issue I was referring to in the OP)

The other issue is (the college/degree issue) is related to equal opportunity (this issue is not really what I was originally posting about though)
Click to expand...

It's a confusing question because information comes in so many forms and is already regulated in many ways. Patents, copyrights for one. Education is a necessity and moral obligation of any society that can provide it, even if it's home schooling. But the cutoff is high school and beyond that should be paid for even if it seems unfair. If you want more informed voters provide a better dossier on the candidates instead of their endless dogma and rhetoric.
 
MusicAdventurer said:
Right ... but what if some information, particularly information that could allow citizens to make better public policy decisions, were made available to all citizens because our taxes would cover any costs "owners" of such information want to apply
Click to expand...

This won't be the answer you're looking for but it's the only one I can conscientiously give.

Government policy should never be so powerful as to negatively affect the daily lives of individuals as a result of popular or political support. In other words, portions of the citizenry should never have the power to forcefully take property from others or coerce them into certain actions.

As such, it should make little difference in our daily lives whether Randy Republican, David Democrat, Larry Libertarian, or Steve Socialist is our President, Senator, Representative, Governor, Mayor, et cetera. In turn, there should never be any specific piece of information which is so valuable as to make a noticeable impact on voting results or individual freedom.

What sort of information are you referring to specifically? Perhaps I am missing the point you are attempting to make.
 
grip said:
But the cutoff is high school and beyond that should be paid for even if it seems unfair.
Click to expand...

Why is high school the cutoff? Why not elementary? Or middle school? Or associate degree?
 
TNAR said:
Why is high school the cutoff? Why not elementary? Or middle school? Or associate degree?
Click to expand...

Because it's where society says we can't afford anymore and not everyone needs to be a professional.
 
grip said:
Because it's where society says we can't afford anymore and not everyone needs to be a professional.
Click to expand...

I must have missed that poll!

Unfortunately, our education system is so engrained into our beliefs that it nearly takes a miracle for someone to consider alternatives. I think this poll somewhat reveals a bit of the problem we face: the public and regulated education system pushes information onto students but fails miserably at bestowing knowledge. I seriously believe we need to take a long and realistic look at our education system and compare it to our desires and means.
 
TNAR said:
This won't be the answer you're looking for but it's the only one I can conscientiously give.

Government policy should never be so powerful as to negatively affect the daily lives of individuals as a result of popular or political support. In other words, portions of the citizenry should never have the power to forcefully take property from others or coerce them into certain actions.

As such, it should make little difference in our daily lives whether Randy Republican, David Democrat, Larry Libertarian, or Steve Socialist is our President, Senator, Representative, Governor, Mayor, et cetera. In turn, there should never be any specific piece of information which is so valuable as to make a noticeable impact on voting results or individual freedom.

What sort of information are you referring to specifically? Perhaps I am missing the point you are attempting to make.
Click to expand...

Being a student of the social sciences, I know that there is information that can only be access via purchase, which, if shared with all citizens, would likely influence (if people understood that information) how people make public policy decisions.

To me, the specific information is not as important as the concept.
 
Can you give an example of the "specific information" to which you refer?
 
grip said:
Because it's where society says we can't afford anymore and not everyone needs to be a professional.
Click to expand...

This is largely changing. More and more, every does need to be a professional.

I don't know about information being free, but it should never be restricted. Access to information needs to be unfettered, and unfiltered. If you're asking whether or not we should fund Wikipedia with taxes... actually, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Though Wikipedia seems to be doing just fine on its own. Even if is it not publicly funded, it's publicly maintained. It's operated by and for the public at large, and that is the correct way to collect and transmit the general body of knowledge. Not everyone needs to know everything, and no one ever could. But anyone should be able to know anything they want.
 
TNAR said:
I must have missed that poll!

Unfortunately, our education system is so engrained into our beliefs that it nearly takes a miracle for someone to consider alternatives. I think this poll somewhat reveals a bit of the problem we face: the public and regulated education system pushes information onto students but fails miserably at bestowing knowledge. I seriously believe we need to take a long and realistic look at our education system and compare it to our desires and means.
Click to expand...

Poll? Who the hell said it was polled, hahaha. Most of the social norms that exist today developed over time. Ask The College of William & Mary why they offered a higher education beyond public.

They try to teach, which is a form of bestowing knowledge through information.
 
TNAR said:
Can you give an example of the "specific information" to which you refer?
Click to expand...

Alright, for example, certain foods and or drugs have been shown to be better or worse for human health. Should all information regarding this be available to the public or only part of it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom