is freedom universal or relative? (1 Viewer)

[Freedom_]

If we look around at the crucial problem areas of every society— the areas of crisis and failure—we find in each and every case a “red thread” marking and uniting them all: the thread of government. In every one of these cases, government either has totally run or heavily influenced catastrophic events and/or undermined the basic principles of freedom.

But one must ask, those who believe in freedom, as much as the idea be poetic, there are so many people across the planet who love to live in a society where the governmnet is so heavily regulating the lives of each individual.

It is universally acknowledged evils of the welfare system (Europe/Australia), moral police (Saudi Arabia - Gulf states), oppression (China) are against the very nature of man's right to be free. Yet, there are so many who are oppressed within so many cultures and states who advocate welfare (people on this forum), moral police (pan Islamic) and oppression (Chinese nationalists).

Is freedom Universal or relative?

 

[Silver Persian]

So the question is something like, if I feel that I am free within a society that is heavily regulated by government, am I:
a) free because I experience myself as being free, or;
b) unfree, because it is possible to objectively identify how the state infringes my liberty.

Is this right?

 

[loquasagacious]

I took it as is freedom contextual? Meaning the choices are that there is an objective definition/measure of freedom or that there isn't.

I think that there is.

 

[Silver Persian]

I took it as is freedom contextual? Meaning the choices are that there is an objective definition/measure of freedom or that there isn't.

Yeah I think we're saying the same thing. For option A there is no objective definition of freedom, such that if you experience yourself as free, you are free. Regardless of any infringements upon liberty that we might identify.

And then option B is that there is an objective way to measure freedom, such that even if I believe I am free, it is possible to objectively prove me wrong.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

It is universally acknowledged evils of the welfare system (Europe/Australia) [...] are against the very nature of man's right to be free

A claim universally acknowledged by Libertarians and laughed at by the vast majority of the rest of society.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

A claim universally acknowledged by Libertarians and laughed at by the vast majority of the rest of society.

Just like in the middle ages, people laughed at the idea of democracy.

Or in Ancient Rome, people no doubt laughed at those who had the audacity to suggest that society could function without slavery.

The fact that the majority of people agree that there is a need for a government which has itself controlled their education does not for one second make them any more likely to be right.

The vast majority of the world's population believes there is a god. Does this mean that they are likely to be correct?

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Just like in the middle ages

Similarly in the middle ages, there was no universal welfare, healthcare, education.

 

[volition]

Similarly in the middle ages, there was no universal welfare, healthcare, education.

This is incorrectly suggesting that the benefits we enjoy are because of state provision

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Defends what you define as 'freedom'.

I feel free, because I can go to school, get enough to eat, have the right to vote, am not persecuted for my views, gender or sexuality, etc, etc. But Freedom would argue that I'm not, because the 'government either has totally run or heavily influenced catastrophic events and/or undermined the basic principles of freedom.' My belief is that the govt enables many of the freedoms I enjoy rather than restricts them, but that doesn't make other people's views inherently wrong.

So yeah, it's relative...but within those relative definitions, I think there can be universality, if that makes sense. One person who defines freedom a certain way would most likely be able to find a way that it is universal.

Also, theoretically, I think there probably is a universal freedom, but not sure if it's practically possible.

 

[Absolutezero]

But is anything universal if it is open to individual interpretation? If we are shaped by our perceptions, then doesn't that make all things relative?

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Defends what you define as 'freedom'.

I feel free, because I can go to school, get enough to eat, have the right to vote, am not persecuted for my views, gender or sexuality, etc, etc. But Freedom would argue that I'm not, because the 'government either has totally run or heavily influenced catastrophic events and/or undermined the basic principles of freedom.' My belief is that the govt enables many of the freedoms I enjoy rather than restricts them, but that doesn't make other people's views inherently wrong.

So yeah, it's relative...but within those relative definitions, I think there can be universality, if that makes sense. One person who defines freedom a certain way would most likely be able to find a way that it is universal.

Also, theoretically, I think there probably is a universal freedom, but not sure if it's practically possible.

These crazy libertarians. What about my positive FREEDOM to spend other people's money and to tell them how to live their lives.

You can talk about freedom as including positive and negative freedoms if you like. But just so you know when libertarians use the word freedom, they only mean negative freedoms, so you can not accuse them of hypocrisy or inconsistency because they don't recognize positive freedoms.

 

[Fish Tank]

Well I could say that freedom is democracy, and America will liberate everyone from the clutches of communism, but I won't

I shall throw in my two cents now...

I'd say freedom has a universal basis, but with slight variations according to different cultures. It's a biological imperative to eat, sleep, drink and find shelter from the extremes, so I would say the ability to do that without impairment is a pretty good foundation. Also, people don't want to be depressed, cos that just doesn't feel right. To be happy and not have limitations on that would also be freedom.

I'd say freedom = happy living. The method in which that is achieved may differ according to different people. However, the goal is basically the same.

 

[Iron]

This whining appeal to such an unrealistic ideology merely exposes an intense desire to escape moral responsibility for your own life. It shows up how terrified you actually are of your sins.
Put away childish things Freedom. Reject the farce of an earthly utopia and return to the Father who awaits you with open arms...

 

[loquasagacious]

This whining appeal to such an unrealistic ideology merely exposes an intense desire to escape moral responsibility for your own life. It shows up how terrified you actually are of your sins.
Put away childish things Freedom. Reject the farce of an earthly utopia and return to the Father who awaits you with open arms...

Freedom doesn't mean nihilism.... in fact I think the freedom coexists very well with humanism.

 

[SylviaB]

the Father who awaits you with open arms...

I lol'd

 

[Iron]

I think it's more laughable that you all fall over yourselves in praise of this ellusive notion of freedom, praising something like the statue of liberty as a great symbol of your cause etc.
How did the French Revolution work out for people again? Were they more free? Were things even better than they would have been without the violent maddness?
It is the logic of ideology. When you subject humans to the idea you decide to worship, the result has to be inhuman suffering.

True freedom is not an 'opting out' of society and reality. It is an opting in – a participation in Being itself. Hence authentic freedom can never be attained by turning away from God. Such a choice would ultimately disregard the very truth we need in order to understand ourselves. Only in faith can truth become incarnate and reason truly human, capable of directing the will along the path of freedom

 

[Bigboyjames lol]

its freedom to kill israel.

that is unversal.

 

[Bigboyjames lol]

libertarianism iwas created by Jews to infiltrate the establishment. I do not buy this bs that OP spouts....i can guarantee you he is JEW

 

[Bigboyjames lol]

and stfu iron. srsly, your whack job Jesus shit is fucking sad dude. like wtf? do you fucking sit there reading the fucking bible. ffs, get a fucking life dude. fuck bro, I read the bible once because i didnt have the guts to say no to the local Anglican church that preached to us every week to leave us the fuck alone. anyways near the end of the bible i was fucking scared to read such crazy shit. Jesus is going to bring death and destruction to earth? wtf is wrong with you/?

 

[jb_nc]

is the concept of relativitely relative or universal