![]() This question may be seen from at least three perspectives: In what ways are we free? In what does free will consist? How come we have free will, if we do? All other freedoms pre-suppose, are subordinate to, and are irrelevant without free will.Ĭonsider one of the ways in which we may see ourselves as free: free as a bird, or as a wild animal. ( To Althea, from prison, Richard Lovelace 1618-58) ![]() If we can do this then we are free to choose anything and can amend our lives accordingly to achieve what we choose, which could then be anything our human capabilities allow. I would thus suggest that we are free in as much as we able to reject our own egos and preconceptions to give us the widest available potential options in our lives. The moment I thought about this critically, as to what I wanted or not, the keys began to turn in the locks – but before that, when I looked at the world to consider my choices, I was free. I could go anywhere, do anything, and be accompanied by anyone. At the point where I reached adulthood I was able to look at the world and decide how I wanted to be a part of it. Before I decided on all the things that locked me up, and decided on who I was going to be, I had this freedom. In its purest form freedom is having the largest amount of potential experiences, and having the greatest physical and mental mobility to be able to choose from those experiences. Given this, how am I free at all? In fact, have I not spent my whole life choosing to not be free? Is life just a path into a more and more restrictive cell, until I am unable to make any choice and am trapped forever? There are hundreds more I have not mentioned. ![]() I have friends, family, and an elderly neighbourĮach of these is a lock I have placed on my cell. The moment I consider freedom, I think of myself as trapped in an elaborately locked cell: ![]() Rashan John, Pathanamthitta, Kerala, India In society we are (or ought to be considered?) free to the extent that our actions do not harm others. If I were Robinson Crusoe, I could do all the things that are physically possible for me. But on the other hand, I am still free to think, and free to write whatever I like.Īctually, freedom consists of three main principles:ġ) The absence of human coercion or restraint preventing one from choosing the alternatives one would wish.Ģ) The absence of physical constraints in natural conditions which prevent one from achieving one’s chosen objectives.ģ) The possession of the means or the power to achieve the objective one chooses of one’s own volition. I can’t choose to go out for stroll, eat a pizza or go to the cinema. If I am imprisoned then obviously I am not free physically in any significant way. We are free in some respects and not in others. With no clear answer, and only garrulous analytical disputation in sight, it is easy to see why the mainstream media redefines ‘freedom’. Original agent causation through the power of the will is also no solution, offering only the even more difficult problem of mind and body dualism. Scientific and philosophical views seem to object to the idea of indeterminism, and Hume’s compatibilism (we’re simultaneously both determined and free) does not seem to work either. It is hard to refute determinism in a world where almost all scientific disciplines depend on physical cause and effect. It is this conflict that provides the real problem of how we are free. While it is generally understood that human beings have the ability to think and act freely as rational and moral agents, the common causal laws by which all human activities and responses are governed are incontestable. If you cannot avoid acting in a particular way, then your action is not free. ![]() To be completely free, or to do something of your own free will, it is essential that you could have acted otherwise. SUBSCRIBE NOW Question of the Month How Are We Free? The following answers to this central philosophical question each win a random book. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |