Freedom and equality in modern thought
Introduction
This essay aims to analyze the "Enlightenment" through Emmanuel Kant, which describes it as the liberation of man from his culprit incapacity;That is where this concept will be connected with freedom, because somehow it is about transmitting that man, through the Enlightenment, is how he manages to be free. Free in terms of acquiring the knowledge that he wants, to acquire an ideology that compacs with what he thinks, freedom in his actions, but with use of reason. Now, before being able to ask the main question of this essay, the transcendental is to be able to explain freedom from these terms.
Freedom, according to the definition of the RAE, is the "natural faculty that man has to work in one way or another, and not work, so he is responsible for his actions" coupled with what is mentioned in Kant, it is the stage that starts when fulfilling the age, but the question is, can man have an illustration without freedom? And if so, what would be the man, if he is not a free man? In the context that it is the fulfillment of the age of majority, if it could become a free man?
In order to break down in the most correct way these concerns that are born from freedom, Emmanuel Kant’s illustration will be described and what is understood by freedom through the words of Stuart Mill. To, from this, to be able to create the correct answer to the question and try to solve it in the best way and with a complete explanation.
Illustration
Obviously the historical contexts that lived as much as Kant and the one that is currently lived are not the same, but from this the best possible explanation will be given before our questions about the Enlightenment. The movement of the Enlightenment was born in the seventeenth century and took strength in the 18. As already mentioned for Kant, the idea of the Enlightenment goes on the other hand, it leans more at the time when man could open his eyes and start using his own account and not because someone dictated it.
He set an example in reading what is the Enlightenment? If, in some way, everything available to oneself, the doctor who dictates what you should take and what actions you should have for your care or the book that practically limited you to knowing only about its content without questioning. All this following the "laziness and cowardice" that one had about himself, so he has to stick to the rules imposed on him. It is difficult to get out of that disability might even seem impossible because it is glad to be in that second nature, according to Kant.
I refer to an example of everyday life to clarify this theory of illustration, because when we are little, parents do the tasks that correspond to us and even corrupt us trying to take care of us, they do not let us venture from the fear of the care of the children. Thus, when the age of majority is reached, it is preferred. And of course, it sounds very easy to demarcate from the obligations that corresponds to a majority because the idea of illustration is only for those brave who dare to question and not follow.
Seeing the illustration in this way it is difficult to achieve that, to which I would call correct illustration, because there are few who have those firm steps when understanding and reasoning in the search questions to what is offered as already established. Obviously understanding and reasoning are not the same, but it is clear that they can make a correct conjunction to explain;Understanding refers more to how we understand reality from what he perceives in life and above all of what we live and what we can live. The reasoning as Kant mentions, "is human nature because it makes understanding possible".
The illustration for Kant does not require anything other than freedom because from it it is how the reasoning of man to society is published. Freedom is freedom of expression in these times, it is what was important for Kant at that time and for what was fought. A clear example can be feminist manifestations from critical reasoning and above all understanding that society is extremely macho and that it is lived day by day, it is known that it is not fair and there is no gender equality in work issuesAnd much less opportunities for women. Only through manifestations is where one began to be free, the movement took strength because the main reason for the struggle is not to be rooted to traditional rules or norms, no reasons, obeys!, Thus he would sound in Kant’s words by mentioning examples of the government is its historical context.
From this, Kant mentions that, if there may be something that stops the illustration, if there is an obstacle to reason and simply discuss the idea that as an individual who still does not have his illustration he is guided by a tutor whoHe never had it, either for laziness or in another case because he was governed under rules throughout his life. These types of cases delay the arrival of an illustration and especially because it is not made public, it is not expressed and is what characterizes the movement. I take the case of feminists again if the illustration before the multiple femicides would not have been possible, the endless complaints and accusations would continue without having a procedure and the woman would have to shut up because it is what has been imposed, both in religious beliefsas by machismo.
So yes, there can be or there is already that part of the society that resists the Enlightenment, which does not make it public and in it it does not achieve its freedom. And this is the other part of the society that abuses that freedom and comes to snatch the freedom of others.
Freedom
Returning to the definition offered by RAE makes sense and we are not so far from the meanings within modern theorists and authors, because this definition sounds and is very attached to what Kant tells us, freedom is that activity related to our wayof acting and for which we are responsible. Within Stuart Mill’s reading, more social or civil freedom is commented on, what would call public, to the limits in which we find either for issues of power and above all that can influence the freedoms of the other.
The text refers us to the struggle that can exist in authority and freedom, as it can globally influence a society. A clear example is the decisions that are made within the government and that can directly affect the freedom of each individual. Of course, violence to rights and freedoms can only directly affect the State and that is when actions can be taken against such violence, but even that is not clear in society and becomes confusing. In this way Mill explains freedom within a society and raising it within the context that is handled in this essay, and leading it to an example of current daily life, the accusations that may exist can exist: "You are violating my rights"that sounds convinced before someone who does not even know their freedoms and their place within the state.
It is thought that this is when the freedom of the individual is also interrupted, when another person who is equal to you in terms of reasoning capacities believes that your freedom can directly affect your freedom. Hence the idea of the text in which the rulers were requested.
But since they did not have the same needs, the same could not be thought. Hence the problems in governments, unfortunately in Mexico history is the same in terms of freedoms, until the lacks are not lived in their own flesh, they do not identify.
Concluding this reading and moving to the central question of the essay, freedom within governments begins to be limited with the separation of powers. Somehow oppose ideals that make conflict, therefore, becomes the best option with and for the people. All for individualism to look like that part of freedom.
Can man have an illustration without freedom?
Returning to what was commented within the illustration in Kant it was mentioned that freedom is a key factor within the illustration since it is the correct way that can be made public and above all visible the illustration of an individual, without it it is possible that it bevery difficult to reach that contemplation of the Enlightenment.
Freedom is a natural faculty, that is, it is implemented without any intention, because it is a capacity that all human beings have. I think it is easier to try not to be free, in terms of knowledge and reason by not opposing certain ideas in which they do not agree and act similarly to those people who dictate it.
The idea that when leaving that guilty minority of age is what opens the way to illustration through freedom, makes it more clear that there cannot be an illustration without freedom. A very colloquial example can be a young man who gets to make use of reason before the imposition of his extremely conservative and religious parents. This doubt begins because I should follow religious customs if there has not been a "divine" moment or because women are the only ones who can cook (extreme example) if for the kitchen it is a passion and above all a profession. This is how they separate from those guides, which at first could seem normal and that we think that everything they do is the right thing, but that for the minority of society they are not the only ideas.
Returning to the argument that for some it is usually easier not to leave that comfort stage, that is, before fulfilling the age of majority, in which these guides do everything for one, there are young “lazy” and incapable young people, thanThey conform to what society dictates to them, with what a priest or a politician with little experience can tell them and how they are assesThey remain.
There are no desire to know if it is true or not what is dictated, if the actions by the government do not compete in their freedoms. This argument is successful in most of the country, Mexico does not advance since it does not want to illustrate. This is where another concept that Kant mentions about collective illustration enters, it does not yet get out of it.
Concluding this section, there can be no illustration without freedom, especially opinions and thought, obviously they can be governed by the Government, but a thought no one can prohibit it. It should also be clarified that the use of freedom without illustration can harm society because their freedom is not based on anything and are issues that are discussed today.
What would become the man, if he is not a free man?
With what has already been mentioned, we can answer this question because freedom enters hand with the illustration, but it is not that it appears until that moment if it was previously guided, or I would say, governed and controlled by a tutor. Obviously it would not be a man free to carry out actions that demonstrate his convictions, he would simply be a being tied to rules and norms established by another man who joy of un controlled freedom but that perhaps within his thoughts if he is free. I can think of a priest controlling the ideas and thoughts of his followers to an extreme degree, in which they cannot express their interests in any way because it would be a foul to their dictator.
Even the priests themselves can be taken as the perfect example of a man who is not being freely free, lives under the thoughts of another and in which an objection is the most incorrect thing that you can act. It is the example in which I think when mentioning a man who is not free and especially in the decision of his own interests, which is not illustrated. So it becomes a man who has not passed and not cut that connection with his guide, becomes a lazy and unluved being.
Being when fulfilling the age of majority, could it automatically become a free man?
As already mentioned, it was given as an example from Kant that lazy beings who did not seek to illustrate and soak up life did not become freely free, but rather that freedom could express it. The age of majority, for me, would be more a general frame of reference in which the illustration could be better appreciated in a being.
There may be a young man or an adult who arrives at the stage of his illustration and is not precisely when he fulfilled the age of maturity.
There are cases, in which I now start to think, where his stage of freedom and above all of breakYou just have to follow the rules that, for one, are not correct. With this I do not want it to be bad that the rules should not be followed, because it is not what I want to transmit but that those ideas, for example, conservative are the ones that have to end.
Because it is finally what happens to be perpetual towards the following generations and that in our current context is optimal, the fair and that there is no doubt that in the future you can change. Perhaps at all times we are in the search for reason, freedom and above all of the Enlightenment and is the mere to discover that counterweight to both governmental and family traditions.
Conclusions
Practically the conclusions were given in the development of this essay, the Enlightenment was a movement that took strength in the S.XVIII, but that to date continues to mark that stage in society, not so marked and in less quantity, but is present and above all ready to develop. Freedom is a task of high responsibility, it is the expression of what we think and what we want to reason, but freedom also lives without reason, that sounds more like an impulse rather than an action with purpose.
Freedom is a symbol of who we are, what we think and especially how we act before society. It is rare to think that before this expressive freedom was not had, that part was reserved only because it was a privilege for the powerful and that it was not questioned if it was properly correct against everyone’s freedoms or was simply being derived and ignoring theinterests of the people. In this way I understand that the movement of the Enlightenment not only meant and had an impact on a generation but that to date it will have its place in each individual and that so that there is that congruence, understanding and reason throughout society we must make more senseWhat happens inside her.
I conclude with the idea that arose in research and especially the relationship of freedom with illustration and is that as much as education, both personal and family experiences encourage you to achieve illustration, both of your daily and academic life. The society that is foreign to these activities becomes that person without expressive freedom, it adheres to what they believe deserves. Therefore, the importance of having at least one basis for social knowledge because only this can be understood by social issues, in addition to the fact that we are always immersed in these issues and seems incredible that the vast majorthat can aspire.
Bibliography
- Ricardo Parellada . (2000). Kant and illustration . November 29, 2019, from Academia Website: https: // www.academy.EDU/439803/KANT_Y_LA_ILUSTRAC%C3%B3N
- John Stuart Mill. (s/a). About freedom . November 29, 2019, from Freeditorial Website: File: /// c:/users/user/downloads/over_la_libertad.PDF
- Roberto r. Aramayo. (2001). Kant and the Enlightenment . December 1, 2019, from Isegoria Website: https: // digital.CSIC.es/Bitstream/10261/9777/1/kant%20y%20la%20ilustration%C3%B3n.PDF
- Emmanuel Kant . (2009). What is illustration?. December 1, 2019, of Education Forum Web Site: File: /// C:/Users/User/Downloads/Kant,%20que%CC%81%20ES%20LA%20ILUSTRACIO%CC%81N_.PDF
- VERA HERNÁNDEZ ILSE VIVIANA. (s/a). What is illustration? By Emmanuel Kant . December 1, 2019, from Academia Website: https: // www.academy.EDU/29768749/LA_ILUSTRAC%C3%B3N._Kant
Leave feedback