|
| Thread: What is freedom? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted January 08, 2014 10:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And Blizzard is right on target.
I agree. It's a brief yet very useful post. Compartmentalizing (is this the -or at least a- right verb here?) it into fields will prevent a lot of communication failure.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 04:04 AM |
|
|
The word "freedom" is one of those unfortunate words in the English language that refers to different things in different contexts, but because it's the same word, people tend to get them confused. It'd be best to have separate words for all of them, but that's not how the language turned out.
As I see it, there are three kinds of freedom (though they're not really "kinds of freedom", they're three different things referred to by the same word):
- Free will. This is the ability to select among alternatives and act as you chose. For example, you can choose to lift one of your arms, then lift it, exercising your freedom. Free will is contrasted with an unfree will and no will. The best example of an unfree will is someone who's completely paralyzed - no matter what they will, they can't get their body to respond in any way. Examples of things without a will are numerous - for example, rocks. In this respect, someone can make you less free, by paralyzing you, for example.
- Freedom of action. This is your ability to do what you want. If you want to fly to the Moon, you can. If you want to murder everyone, you can. Only an omnipotent being has perfect freedom of action. Your freedom of action is limited by your abilities and resources, other people's choices, and physical laws.
- Political freedom. This is your freedom to do whatever you want as long as you don't violate the rights of others. What those rights are is a subject probably best left for a different thread. But whatever they are, violating someone's rights is not an instance of freedom. For example, you're not free to steal a grandma's purse.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 05:47 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 05:49, 09 Jan 2014.
|
Quote:
- Free will. This is the ability to select among alternatives and act as you chose. For example, you can choose to lift one of your arms, then lift it, exercising your freedom. Free will is contrasted with an unfree will and no will. The best example of an unfree will is someone who's completely paralyzed - no matter what they will, they can't get their body to respond in any way. Examples of things without a will are numerous - for example, rocks. In this respect, someone can make you less free, by paralyzing you, for example.
Without a free will you can't have freedom, it's a prequisite and very very relative. However, free will is not freedom, it is already a different set of words than freedom. And your example has nothing to do with it, Stephen Hawking is almost completely paralyzed, does he have less free will?
In Turkish we have two words meaning free, özgür which is for the philosophical aspect, being free as a state of mind and serbest which is for the daily stuff, as in it's free to smoke in this restaurant. The second one is more like unrestricted, at liberty. Being disabled in body functions has nothing to do with free will, it is about being restricted physically, not mentally.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 06:01 AM |
|
|
artu said:
And your example has nothing to do with it, Stephen Hawking is almost completely paralyzed, does he have less free will?
He has less ability to control himself, so - yes. He still has free will if you take it to be a binary thing, but if you consider it quantitatively, he has less.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 09:04 AM |
|
Edited by Zenofex at 09:07, 09 Jan 2014.
|
The closest thing that I have as a personal definition of freedom is fairly similar to the philosophy of this guy - to master your own temptations, fears and urges for extreme behaviour but not to restrain yourself from what is good for you. It has flaws of course but then again, every definition of freedom has.
In general, freedom is one of those abstract concepts which defies objective definitions and is impossible to apply in practice as something universal - simply because the individual understandings of freedom are vastly more than the "agreed upon" definitions and the latter are nothing more than "consensus freedom". Every attempt to define freedom objectively sooner or later arrives to something independent from this world.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 09:18 AM |
|
|
Useless definition, Mvass.
Freedom has nothing to do with abilities. There ARE restrictions we have to live with, since we ARE that way. We simply cannot teleport from one planet to another, but we are not less free because of it.
Likewise, just because it's NORMAL that our species comes with two legs, having only one isn't inhibiting FREEDOM - having to sit in a wheelchair doesn't make you unfree - just handicapped and less mobile.
POLITICAL freedom, like you call it, has something to do with physical power. If an entity uses any kind of power against you to force their will unto you - be it a dictator reigning over the country you happen to live in or be it the laws of the democratic state you live in -, you can always resist. Now, sure, that may have consequences, and consequences which are not pretty, but that's not changing anything about the fact you are still free to resist.
Think of the novel 1984, which comes with a lot of practical wisdom, so-to-speak. Think about what O'Brien tells Winston about WHY they do what they do. He tells him, that they don't want no martyrs. People who die DEFYING the powers that kill them - not renouncing -, they die FREE. Which is what they want to destroy. TRUE freedom.
TRUE freedom, as I said, is a state of mind. It's completely immaterial, because due to the limitations of our species and our life we can NEVER be MATERIALLY or PHYSICALLY free, because there will always be death, sickness and inability lurking.
Likewise, if freedom is a question of power, there can never be real freedom because humans will never be All-powerful.
Since it makes no sense to define a term so that it's something never to be attained, that leaves only MENTAL freedom - a state of mind. Having no fear of loss, limitations and shortcomings that come with our material existence - THAT is freedom.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 10:57 AM |
|
|
mvassilev said:
artu said:
And your example has nothing to do with it, Stephen Hawking is almost completely paralyzed, does he have less free will?
He has less ability to control himself, so - yes. He still has free will if you take it to be a binary thing, but if you consider it quantitatively, he has less.
If you use freedom in the daily sense, (as in serbest) he is quantitatively less free and this can even lead to a difference of quality in his life if our criteria is COMFORT. But he definitely does not have less FREE WILL. As JJ pointed it out, some things are just a bigger hurdle for him, yet, he can still decide about them. Of course, he cant decide to be an NBA player or a violin maestro but neither can you.
Overall, he is capable of making the major decisions regarding his life and we all have our limitations. Of course, this is all asumming free will exists for anybody.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 02:51 PM |
|
|
As I said earlier, the problem is that completely different things are referred to by the same word. Political freedom is not freedom of action, and neither of them is free will. They're related in the sense that they all have something to do with doing whatever you want, but beyond that, they're different. So if the state restricts you from doing something, you can still try to do it, because you have freedom of action and free will - but, depending on what's restricted, it can still be a reduction of your political freedom. A restriction of political freedom doesn't necessarily mean that you literally can't do something, it means that there will be repercussions from the state if it finds out. You are free to resist, but that isn't political freedom.
It's freedom of action that's about what you can do in the literal sense. But that means that the more you can do, the freer you are, so humans are less free for not being able to fly. But humans are free to think - that's also freedom of action.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 04:05 PM |
|
|
Wait, so a slave is free because he or she can try to escape?
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 04:09 PM |
|
|
Depends on what you mean by "free". Politically, no. By freedom of action, yes.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 04:14 PM |
|
|
Then it what situation is there no freedom of action?
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted January 09, 2014 04:43 PM |
|
|
A completely paralyzed person has very little freedom of action, as they can't do anything except think. It's still not total absence of freedom of action, though. Only inanimate objects totally lack freedom of action.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted January 10, 2014 12:15 AM |
|
|
For freedom there has to be free will. If not, you may be able to get whatever you want, but you can't choose anything, hence it's 0 * X = 0.
For free will (and hence freedom) there has to be consciousness, if there's no one to make the decision, no decision to be made among possible decisions, again it's 0 * X = 0.
Therefore, non-living things can't have freedom. They are always bound by outer circumstances. Are humans too? Some says yes, some says no, I'm not sure.
|
|
Alexgaeien
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 11, 2014 02:01 PM |
|
|
Freedom is not only being free, but feeling free; to do, to say, to be, to literally (anything) - whatsoever and however, wherever and whenever. Because I am myself, and only I own me, therefore I can, so come what may, I believe I am free, free as a bird.
________________________
[URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy facebook votes[/URL] l [URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy contest votes[/URL] l [URL=http://voteservices.co.uk/buy-facebook-votes-contest-votes-apps-votes]buy facebook vote[/URL]
|
|
georgekamble
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted March 22, 2014 12:58 PM |
|
|
Freedom is the right and capacity of people to determine their own actions, in a community which is able to provide for the full development of human potentiality. Freedom may be enjoyed by individuals but only in and through the community.Freedom also means the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants.
____________
[URL=http://www.praguekabinet.com/en/catalogue/contemporary-art]contemporary art in prague[/URL] l [URL=http://www.praguekabinet.com/en/catalogue/contemporary-art]prague art gallery[/URL]
|
|
kayna
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2014 02:43 PM |
|
|
|
Freedom is what Mel Gibson yells in every of his movies.
|
|
Fauch
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted March 22, 2014 03:45 PM |
|
|
| |
|
|
