|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:55 pm
What is freedom? Is it the ability to do what you want? Or is it the absence of outside forces telling you what to do? Either way, I'm not sure that "freedom" exists in the true sense of the word. Let's take a look at the webster definition of the ideal of freedom:
Main Entry: free·dom
Pronunciation: 'frE-d&m
Function: noun
1 the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action
b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : INDEPENDENCE c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous d : EASE, FACILITY e : the quality of being frank, open, or outspoken
2 a : a political right synonyms FREEDOM, LIBERTY, LICENSE mean the power or condition of acting without compulsion. FREEDOM has a broad range of application from total absence of restraint to merely a sense of not being unduly hampered or frustrated . LIBERTY suggests release from former restraint or compulsion . LICENSE implies freedom specially granted or conceded and may connote an abuse of freedom .
FREE
1 a : having the legal and political rights of a citizen b : enjoying civil and political liberty c : enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination d : enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of anotherAfter reviewing the definition, it makes me wonder if anything can truly be free. We will ALWAYS be under the control of an outside domination. Anytime one person is free, then another person's freedom is being stepped upon. One person may think they deserve the freedom to smoke anywhere, and another person wants the freedom of clean air & no smoke. And if anyone DECIDES they are free... then they are likely to end up imprisoned or dead. As one man's freedome encroaches upon anothers. This really boils down to the inherent flaw in a government as well... and the inherent flaw in a heaven that works for eveyrone. As we are all individuals with our own tastes, and what each person likes another person may hate. Even inanimate objects are bound by the laws of science... and asteroids floating "freely" in distant space are still under the influence of gravity and other objects. With all these points, how is it possible for ANYTHING to be free? Does freedom really exist, or is it another false ideal that man has invented? Or is the only true freedom death? I have always wondered what it's like to be free. -ochimaru
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:34 pm
My impression is that freedom is not "to be able to do whatever you want" but "to be able to do what you need."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:41 pm
In the purest most unadaultered definition of the word, not it can't.
In a practical definition of the word, yes it can. It's all about attitude. I want clean air, but there is a man smoking. I walk away to an area that has clean air. Freedom.
Freedom ties directly into choice. I chose to be offended or not, thus, my freedom may or may not be encroached upon. Political and social freedoms are rooted in the freedom to chose. Forget the Free Will thread, and just run with it. I can chose to like what I am given, or not, thus I am free to eat or refuse. Any restrictions on our freedoms are placed on us by our psykie. Except of coarse for deliberate outside forces.
The asteroid drifts freely. While mathmatically no object in space is completely free from gravitational force (or any other forces for that matter), for all practical purposes it is. A man has a gun to my head and orders me. I have the freedom to chose my next action, but in a way I am restrained from what I can do in my next action. I am forced to act in the ordered manner only as long as I chose my safety and well being over the action I'm carrying out.
So, all in all, freedom is a state of mind; a state of being. You are as free as you want to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:37 am
"Absence of ristriction" is a perfectly workable definition. Quote: ...how is it possible for ANYTHING to be free? It depends on what type of restriction is being considered, and whether or not there is 'free will'; (I believe not, for the reasons explained in our topic on that). If only physical restrictions opposed to what one wants to do are considered (as is usual), people have freedom, but not absolute freedom; objects have none.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 5:05 am
This reminds me of my 'happiness' thread in ED.
Freedom in the sense of being able to do whatever you want and not having any restrictions does not exist, and never will. However, the freedom of choice--the freedom to, if there is one, make a choice according to your own 'free' will, is possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:53 am
Freedom while you live in a sociaty is impossible
but if you were to become a hermit in some forsaken forest or valley or something than whatever you do will not be judged or watched by anotehr person so your actions will not be influenced so that is as close as we can get to freedom, by shutting yourself off from the world and becoming truly independent becosue all you depend on is yourself
and with independence comes freedom
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:32 am
Mechanism "Absence of ristriction" is a perfectly workable definition. Quote: ...how is it possible for ANYTHING to be free? It depends on what type of restriction is being considered, and whether or not there is 'free will'; (I believe not, for the reasons explained in our topic on that). If only physical restrictions opposed to what one wants to do are considered (as is usual), people have freedom, but not absolute freedom; objects have none.
When contemplating human freedom, I think of people in-themselves and for-themselves. When a human being transcends these "restrictions" that a life of choice places upon us, he/she becomes free in the sense that he/she is free from themselves. The human conscience is what makes humanity the most free, yet also the least free.
As Hegel explains, freedom is an absolute idea that has potential. When that potential is realized, freedom is no longer absolute. Freedom is the perpetual conflict of one's conscience. When we escape ourselves, we experience freedom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:41 am
Freedom is played as an unstoppable force. it is undenyable, unmoveable, and yet is light, wavering, sensible. it is the ability to do anything and everything. It is the universal balance and unbalance... a shift of dimensions if you will. it can not be harnessed by one body or being. freedom is and always will be... untouchable...unsensed, and unseen by all forever. until our entities become pure energy, in which case freedome is all and nothing at once. freedom is a toy. freedom is a joke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 9:47 am
breaking of dawn Mechanism "Absence of ristriction" is a perfectly workable definition. Quote: ...how is it possible for ANYTHING to be free? It depends on what type of restriction is being considered, and whether or not there is 'free will'; (I believe not, for the reasons explained in our topic on that). If only physical restrictions opposed to what one wants to do are considered (as is usual), people have freedom, but not absolute freedom; objects have none.
When contemplating human freedom, I think of people in-themselves and for-themselves. When a human being transcends these "restrictions" that a life of choice places upon us, he/she becomes free in the sense that he/she is free from themselves. The human conscience is what makes humanity the most free, yet also the least free.
As Hegel explains, freedom is an absolute idea that has potential. When that potential is realized, freedom is no longer absolute. Freedom is the perpetual conflict of one's conscience. When we escape ourselves, we experience freedom.
but how does one escape ones self? your body is not a confinement. it is a whole. it can not be separated fromabsolutely everything. if the human body was completely severed from restrictions, then it would not exist as a human, but as an entity that would never find true stability, and would therefore laps over the universe and become a god (in mild proportions) and nothing would exist. in order to be free, you would have to be rid of everything and everyone in existance. in truth there is no freedom. because if there was, there would be nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 9:37 am
Freedom is also directly tied to the debate on whether we have free will or there is a predetermined destiny. As in Donnie Darko, everyone's pathway was already pre-determined. I personally believe that we all have free will, but I do not believe the ideal of freedom exists, except if you are living within a cave on a mountain... and even then, you are not free b/c you don't have friends or luxuries that you may want.
The tangible freedom that we experience is definitely a mindset. Sometimes a conditioned mindset, but a mindset none-the-less. If a person lives in a communist society and WANTS to be communist, then they may feel free. Free of all the hassles that a capitalist society puts upon the people. While a capitalist would feel opressed in that same society.
Tangible freedom results from passing judgement upon yourself. If you THINK you are free, than you probably believe in freedom. But if you THINK that the man is keeping you down and everyone is opressing you, than you feel more like a slave.
So, I guess, that begs to ask the question...
Is freedom the opposite of slavery?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:44 pm
Bo-Bo When we escape ourselves, we experience freedom. I am where I am. If one were to "escape themself" they would become someone else, or else not exist. ochimaru Is freedom the opposite of slavery? You can be not a slave and not free, unless you define something which determines your behaviour as something you are a "slave to".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:18 am
Bo-Bo The Great but how does one escape ones self? your body is not a confinement. it is a whole. it can not be separated fromabsolutely everything. if the human body was completely severed from restrictions, then it would not exist as a human, but as an entity that would never find true stability, and would therefore laps over the universe and become a god (in mild proportions) and nothing would exist. in order to be free, you would have to be rid of everything and everyone in existance. in truth there is no freedom. because if there was, there would be nothing.
To answer the question whether freedom is opposite of slavery: No. As Marx describes, within slavery one envisions freedom. Idle masters aren't free; they don't understand freedom. Slaves, on the other hand, dream of freedom and work towards that ideal, thus freeing themselves (yet never attaining said freedom).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:40 am
Freedom...hah. I do believe I'll quote one of my favorite songs on this one. The Verve 'Cause it's a bittersweet symphony, this life
Try to make ends meet
You're a slave to money then you die That being said, no, freedom does not exist. I've actually seriously thought about packing a small bag, walking into the woods somewhere, and not coming back. The problem with that is what could happen to me out there, or if I were to injure myself, or if I were to run out of ways to survive. I'd die, and thus achieve true freedom. We're slaves to everything. I'm an admitted slave to nicotine, caffeine, music, and peanut butter. I know that I couldn't go more than a week without nicotine or caffeine, a couple of days without peanut butter, or an hour without music, without starting to feel it. Hell, I'm nic-fixing right now, and I had two cigarettes yesterday. Not much, but it was enough for then. How many of you could give up everything you put into yourselves for good, right now? Your morning cup of coffee, your two-cigarette coffee break, your double shot of something after dinner. It's all the same. I'm not too proud to admit that I've actually gone through peanut butter withdrawal before. Same with caffeine withdrawal. It's taken me an hour and a half to wake up, and I'm still yawning, because I haven't had any coffee. The only true freedom is d3ath. Any other "freedom" is a minor thought, not worth even half a second of true belief. If I seem cynical...please tell me. I think it's a compliment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:51 am
The thing is... we CHOOSE what we will be slaves to. I don't want to be a slave to communism, therefore I remain in my capitalistic country to be a slave to money and corporations instead.
I'm not a slave to the TV, as I choose the computer as my media master. I'm not a slave to the radio, but I worship my mp3 player as my one true provider of portable music.
I guess I have a similar opinion about what I like. I think what you "like" is just things that you don't hate as much as others. Ah... but that touches on my philosophy that there is always a better way, too. Nothing is perfect. Damn, what a pessimist, huh?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 24, 2005 6:29 am
ochimaru The thing is... we CHOOSE what we will be slaves to. That's assuming free will.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
