Freedom does not exist according to the book Philosophy III Ethics
What is the Liberty? According to my consultation book Bilosophy III ethics, he tells us that freedom is when “the individual is able to act for himself, to make his own decisions, with relative independence of internal and external coercions."However, we can never be totally free, not if there is something behind our decision, an antecedent, which means that an event is connected to another, since if one had not occurred, the other had not happened.
Arguing this point, we have the astronomer and mathematician Pierre Laplace (1974-1827), who argues that physical reality is totally determined, is summoned by Frondizi (1977): “We must consider,” says Laplace-the current state of the universe as the effect of theprevious state and as the cause of the state that follows […]."
Pure freedom can never exist why? Since the moment we are born, we cannot be free, because we are the origin of a being that we call ‘mom’ who imposes us how we should behave and although we grow and want to free ourselves from their bonds, we will face a decision that entails responsibility.
"Thus the American psychologist B.F Skinner writes a work with the title: beyond freedom and dignity, where he argues that "a person’s behavior is determined by the hereditary dowry and by environmental circumstances", so that he is not the individual, butThe environment, the person responsible for human behavior."Escobar, G. (2019). Ethics Introduction to its problem and history (Sixth ed.). McGraw-Hill.
If we want to be free from our mothers we have to choose for ourselves, and with that we are free? I hope it was as simple as that. At the time of acting, we not only think of ourselves, but also in others, which leads us again to responsibility, a concept that will be linked to freedom. As we see we are not free if every time we act we have to think about not affecting any other individual, as we are implied according to Kantian ethics.
The problem with freedom not only tends to have an authority that regulates our way of acting. Our consciousness does not let us carry out our impulsive instincts. And it is more than anything the existence of the limits that make us affirm that freedom is zero.
Being free means that we decide, think, move and do by will, by desire, without abide by orders, without any impediment or restrictions, all these actions.
According to the definition of freedom given by Hobbes (1651) in his book "Leviatán" he tells us that: "Freedom is understood, according to the meaning of the word, the absence of external impediments, impediments that often reducePart of the power that a man has to do what he wants […] ”(Chapter XIV, pp.101). So we conclude that to exercise our freedom we require a space in which we act without any barrier, without finding any force that hinders at the time of doing our will, that nothing or anyone prevents us from action, either by ingenuity or by desire.
I can’t find any place where we can do our own will without suffering a consequence. From our existence if we do not do something or if we do something we get a reward or punishment. In our home we obey our parents;at school to our teachers;in society to our elders;before the State when complying and respecting the laws. “The point is that man does not yet emancipa, he is still directed by others, he still does not assume the necessary responsibility to be free."
Kant as opposed, denies the approach of freedom as a series of impulses, whether wishes or feelings, which is as much as denying freedom. For him, freedom is the ability to put a norm above any impulse.
The German philosopher considers that man must act rationally, but without pretending to receive something in return. In his theory of duty to be any act that is done must be because such action is good for all, which corresponds to his statement "acts in such a way that your maximum moral becomes universal law" which converges that it is not possiblebe free if such freedom attempts against me. My act cannot be free but is individual, but being free without looking at who would not make me completely free if I do not look for good in general, therefore if I am free to be free to someone else and that one does notcan let me be free, what makes us say that there is no and there will be no freedom.
Returning to what I initially exposed, since one was born, with the first impediment of freedom we find is that of the person who raises us and at the same time being assigned to a type of community. Culture will be responsible for giving us a series of regulations that we must abide by. We grow by adopting the way in which culture sees the world, that is, everything that forms us as an individual.
In this way, culture leads us to act so that our actions correspond to ethics, moral and any type of established norm. Culture teaches us and will guide us towards good and evil. However, when facing what is not morally well seen, we will issue a trial, but while prohibited it will cause us curiosity.
From our existence in this world to our absence, we are part of a community that will not allow us to be free, that our actions and decisions will be regulated by society. The norms were and will continue to be implemented by a culture, so our moral is configured.
If the behavior is controlled by the culture, the family nucleus is the one that will be responsible for the provisions of society and culture, be carried out.
"Freedom;that is, the option of option, valuation and decision;[…] There is one way or another, alternatives and open possibilities […].”(González, 1997)
But this does not mean that we are free, because the decision that will be made of the various possibilities is controlled by our conception of good and evil. And who instills these conceptions us? Nothing more and nothing less than our environment.
conclusion
Freedom and will will be united, in view of considering us free, we commit voluntary acts, but any action we want to perform will be a limit or obstacle, therefore our will is obstructed, freedom is not absolute.
If we understand that free actions are those that are produced without any coercion, however, freedom is full of restrictions. There are limits, conditions, prohibitions and fear that prevents us from fully achieving this capacity, because not only is society the only one that prohibits and limits, the individual also self-strucks many things.
Everything is conditioned, and full freedom, there is no. There is dependence, on employment, culture, money, learning, politics, religion;dependency of parents, a family or a couple.
Pure, total, complete, absolute freedom is not possible. It is not in the individual sphere, which invalidates it in the collective.
As we saw absolute freedom is complicated and very complex, so we are prone to imitate others, look at the past, present and future and find in any corner that culture will influence our behavior.
Finally affirming and concluding this, I want to cite some lines that I read in the ethical book Introduction to its problem and its history “Free activity is one that is not prevented or forced. To say that the acts are not prevented or taxes does not imply denying that they are determined."Escobar, G. (2019).
Leave feedback