|
| 00 |
01 |
02 |
03 |
04 |
05 |
06 |
07 |
08 |
09 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
|
|
 07
|
Liberalism and freedom |
|
0701 |
Liberalism |
|
07010001
|
Recently the idea of progress in the matter of freedom as a political idea has become the flag of a mighty stream of social thinking in the concept of liberalism. The latter may be characterized as spiritual flow, considering freedom as the highest value of life, and the movement to a greater freedom as the most essential task of governmental and other institutions. |
1. Movement to a greater freedom.
Liberalism as spiritual flow, considering freedom as the highest value of life, and the movement to a greater freedom as the most essential task of governmental and other institutions. (07010001) |
|
07010002
|
The concept of liberalism must be cleaned of layers, born by limited opinions about freedom and opinions not actually connected with liberalism as an ideology of a free man. |
|
07010003
|
Liberalism must not be connected neither with soft-bodiedness and characterlessness nor with connivance or all-allowedness. In the original sense liberalism is nothing, what would express these human properties and actions. Freedom as I will show below, is not at all without hardness of character and corresponding behavior. On the contrary it presupposes them. |
|
07010004
|
He who reprimands liberalism, either does not give himself the trouble of deliberating the meaning of the term, or is an antagonist of human freedom. The relationship to liberalism is a litmus paper of progressivity or reactivity of ideas of one or another political activist. |
|
07010005
|
Liberalism presupposes a developed and differentiated conception about freedom. Every sphere of action corresponds to a certain view of freedom: |
|
07010006
|
Which do you consider the five most important views of liberalism?liberal thinking or freedom of thought
freedom of opinion
freedom of conscience
. freedom of religion
freedom of will
social freedom
political freedom
. freedom of word, information
. fredom of meeting
. freedom of union
. freedom to move
. freedom of settlement
economic freedom
. freedom of entreprise
. freedom of property
. freedom of commerce
. freedom of competition
creative freedom
. freedom of art
. freedom of scientific creativity, research
. philosophic freedom
freedom of love
. sexual freedom
|
|
07010007
|
From this far from full enumeration of freedoms may be seen, that liberalism does not appear as strictly political movement. It is a movement of all those who are striving towards a greater freedom. |
|
07010008
|
Give some example of various kinds of aspects of freedom that are mutually dependent.Of course, not all kinds of freedom can be covered with the concept of liberalism. Liberalism concerns above all and mainly the relationships between people, the life of man in a society, among men. But it relates positively to all other freedoms, emanating from the framework of relationships between people (technical freedom or freedoms in relation to natural objects: freedoms of flying, freedoms of going into outer space etc.). In addition to it there are such kinds of freedom which do not only presuppose freedom in relations between people, but also in general the freedom of man (in relation to the nature, the world). Let us take for instance freedom of movement. Its components may be both political possibility of movement and economic, and technical possibility of movement. Economic and technical possibilities of movements depend not so much on the relations between people, as the level of technical development of means of transport and on general level of people’s welfare. Of the mentioned actually with liberalism is connected only politically created freedom of movement. However, to liberalism, also other constructive parts of this freedom are not indifferent. The political freedom of movement is an empty word, if economic and technical possibilities of movement do not exist. In general, to liberalism is not indifferent the scientific and technical, material progress, widening the framework of material, creative freedom and at the same time serving as a base for the widening the freedom of relationships between people.
|
2. Mutually dependent kinds of freedom.
Liberalism concerns relationships between people. But it relates positively to all other freedoms. (07010008) |
|
07010009
|
What specific features contains the marxist view of liberalism?In the marxist philosophy liberalism as a movement of social thinking is unequivocally connected with the bourgeois class. In the Филос. энцикл. словаре ([Philosophic encyclopedistic dictionary] M., 1983) we read ’Liberalism, ideal-political movement, connected with the adherents of bourgeois parliamentarian constitution and bourgeois ‘freedoms’ of economic, political and other spheres.’ This kind of understanding of liberalism is at least twice erroneous. In the first place, out of rather simplified model of social stratification, expressing in the theory of classes, particularly, theory of division of society into the classes of bourgeois and proletariat. This theory ‘sets’ liberalism and other socially political movements in the procrustean loge of one ‘class’. Secondly, in the self-denominating term of liberalism, there is nothing specifically bourgeois. One can speak of the limitedness of some type of liberalism, but assessing all liberalism as bourgelois is rude logical mistake.
|
3. Marxist definition of liberalism.
’Liberalism, ideal-political movement, connected with the adherents of bourgeois parliamentarian constitution and bourgeois ‘freedoms’ of economic, political and other spheres.’ (07010009) |
|
07010010
|
Liberalism must also not be described as ‘a conviction, striving to get rid of traditions, habits, dogms etc. (see Краткую филос. энц. [Short philosophic encyclopedy] M., 1994. p. 241). |
|
07010011
|
In the first place, liberalism is not negative flow, which only strives to get rid of something. |
|
07010012
|
What is the relationship of liberalism towards old and new?Seconly, traditions, habits, mental stereotypes must not be without proof counted among those, of which free man must get rid. In themselves habits, traditions, stereotypes of thought and behavior as forms of regulation of human relationships are not bad, neither good. In addition, they occupy an important place in this regulation. We can speak only of some habits, traditions and stereotypes, but just those, which are obsolete and disturb people in its movement to a greater freedom. Liberal does not deny old, only because it is old, and sustain new because it is new.
|
4. Relationship towards old and new.
Liberal does not deny old, only because it is old, and sustain new because it is new. (07010012) |
|
07010013
|
What is the relationship of liberalism towards humanism?In its natural aspect, according to the term itself, liberalism initially completely agrees with humanism. More than that, liberalism and humanism are mutually compatible. There is no liberalism without humanism and no humanism without liberalism. Humanism is liberalism taken from the point of view of humanity and liberalism is humanism taken in the aspect of freedom. If anybody calling himself liberal presents inhuman or antihuman views, he is not liberal in the authentic sense. If anybody calling himself humanist reprimands liberalism, then he either does not understand the essence of liberalism or is not a real humanist.
|
5. Liberalism and humanism.
There is no liberalism without humanism and no humanism without liberalism. Humanism is liberalism taken from the point of view of humanity and liberalism is humanism taken in the aspect of freedom. (07010013) |
|
07010014
|
‘If you give chains to a slave, the other end of it is fixed in you’. What does it mean?As a matter of fact, for a liberal the freedom is the highest value. And he respects it not only in himself and for himself, but also in others and for others. If, let us suppose, a person recognizes freedom only for himself or for a few only, then in this way he actually refuses it, as far as freedom ‘in himself and for himself’ carries a rather organic (private, not all-comprising) character. To be free among slaves, surrounded by slaves is nonsense. One reasonable person has said: ‘If you give chains to a slave, the other end of it is fixed in you’. Long ago it was observed that a prison guard, controlling the prisoner, is in many respects also prisoner. Really free one can only be among free people. Therefore a genuine liberal appreciates not only his own freedom, but also the freedom of others. Consequently, he is according to the definition, human, humanistic.
|
6. Freedom of others.
Really free one can only be among free people. Therefore a genuine liberal appreciates not only his own freedom, but also the freedom of others. (07010014) |
|
07010015
|
What is the proper minimum level of freedom?To a liberal, obligatorily, dear is the formula, drawn in his time by T Hobbes: ‘man must… be satisfied with that level of freedom, relative to other people, which he would allow in other people in relation to himself’ (F169). This formula is a paraphrase of the golden rule of behavior, and illustrates excellently the connection of freecdom with humanity, liberalism with humanism.
|
7. Liberalism and the golden rule.
‘Man must… be satisfied with that level of freedom, relative to other people, which he would allow in other people in relation to himself’ (07010015) |
|
07010016
|
For a liberal not alien is also another paraphrase of the golden rule: ‘Not breaking other’s rights, you protect yours’ (F170). This rule is followed by natives of Amazon. In their midst the theft is practically inexistent. |
8. Another paraphrase of the golden rule:
‘Not breaking other’s rights, you protect yours’ (07010016) |
|
07010017
|
'Liberal is a finished individualist, trying to reticence and self-isolation.' What can be said of this?Into liberals sometimes were counted those who in essence were not liberal, who in a rather limited manner represent freedom (as independence of habits, traditions, as individual freedom). These unliberals contrived an opinion that liberal is a finished individualist, trying to reticence and self-isolation. What can be said of this? Unconditionally, this opinion is false. Freedom of its very essence is open, has nothing in common with reticence and isolationism. Free society is an open society. A free person is an open person (for communication, mutual action, cooperation with others). It is difficult to imagine liberally tuned person as such a wolf, misantrop, staying aside of other people or living according to the principle ‘my hut is my castle, others I do not know’.
|
9. ‘My hut is my castle'.
Freedom of its very essence is open, has nothing in common with reticence and isolationism. Free society is an open society. (07010017) |
|
07010018
|
What is the relationship of liberalism towards individualism and collectivism?In the contest of individualism and collectivism liberalism takes the position of arbitrary tribunal. It stands against the extreme collectivism, pinching the individual freedom of man, as against the extreme individualism being ignorant of or pinching the freedom of others (all-inclusive freedom).
|
10. Individualism, collectivism, liberalism.
Liberalism takes the position of arbitrary tribunal. It stands against the extreme collectivism, as well as against the extreme individualism. (07010018) |
|
07010019
|
The particularity of liberalism as a social phenomenon consists in that it stands not only for the freedom and not simply for freedom of all, but for a greater freedom, for progress in the matter of freedom. Therefore in the concrete situation liberalism may call for inacceptance and even abhorrence of the side of conservatives, of all those, who are fighting against freedom, greater independency. |
|
07010020
|
As far as progress in the subject-matter of freedom presupposes changes, liberal from beginning, according to the definition, is tuned to reforming, reformulating of society, social structures towards a greater freedom. |
11. Reforming society.
(07010020) |
|
07010021
|
Liberal may be also conservative, if a reached freedom, a reached level of freedom is threatened, changes are undertaken not in favor but in detriment of freedom. Liberal is not only the messenger, activist of freedom, but also its defender, protector. As a messenger, activist of freedom he is progressive, reformator, and even revolutioner. As conserver, defender of freedom he is conservative. |
12. Conservative as defender of freedom.
(07010021) |
|
07010022
|
What is the basic concept of liberalism?As far on the basis of ideology of liberalism lies the concept of freedom, it is just of the treatment of this concept in a significant degree that the understanding of the essence of liberalism is depending.
|
13. Basic concept.
Freedom. (07010022) |
|
0702 |
Freedom |
|
07020001
|
From my point of view freedom is a category of possibility, representing in itself organic unity (mutual enabling) of random occurrence and necessity. – See below diagram of the category ‘possibility’: |
14. Category of possibility.
(07020001) |
|
07020002
|
In what sense is freedom the union of possibilities and necessities? If random occurrence determines the manifold of possibilities, but necessity is their unityform, then freedom is the union of possibilities in their manifold or manifold of possibilities in their union.
|
15. Manifold of possibilities.
(07020002) |
|
070201 |
Opposite views on freedom |
|
07020101
|
What are the two mutually exclusive views of freedom?In the history of philosophy may be observed two mutually exclusive views on the concept of freedom.
|
16. Two mutually exclusive views.
(07020101) |
|
07020102
|
Some philosophers (for instance Spinoza, Holbach, Kant, Schelling, Hegel) approach the concept of freedom with the concept of necessity, they either deny the presence of the element of randomness in freedom or belittle its importance. This is the way in which B. Spinoza characterizes freedom: ‘Freedom is called such a thing which exists according to only for the necessity of own nature and is determined only by itself…’ From Spinoza we have the famous formula: ‘Freedom is the recognition of necessity’ (with him it sounds like this: ‘freedom is recognition ‘with some eternal necessity of oneself, God and things’ [Etica, part 42]. Hegel in his way, interpreted this thiw formula. Then in Marxism it was the basis of the concept of freedom. |
17. Recognition of necessity.
(07020102) |
|
07020103
|
What does Holbach mean with freedom as an 'inexorable necessity'?Its extreme expression this view received with Holbach. ‘For man, he wrote, freedom is nothing else than necessity in itself’ (F171). More accurately, Holbach considered that man cannot be in a genuine sense free, because he is subordinated under the action of laws and consequently belongs to the realm of inexorable necessity. The feeling of freedom, he wrote, is ‘illusion, which may be compared with the illusion of fly of tower, imagining, sitting on a pole of a heavy vehicle, that he is leading the movement of a world-wide engine, as a matter of fact, this machine goes round ruled by man but not known by the fly.’ (F172).
|
18. Inexorable necessity.
Holbach: Man cannot be in a genuine sense free, because he is subordinated under the action of laws and consequently belongs to the realm of inexorable necessity. (07020103) |
|
07020104
|
What is freedom according to Kant?Kant in the ’Critique of Pure Reason’ raised the antinomy: freedom is in man, no freedom exists. In the world of phenomena, according to Kant, the necessity rules, in the world of things themselves man is free. But what is such freedom according to Kant? question is asked by A.A. Gulyga. And answers it in Kant’s manner: ‘This is obeyance of moral duty, that is, again some submission of man under necessity. The task is to choose the correct necessity’ (F173). In the book dedicated to Kant, A.A. Gulyga explains his position in the following manner: ‘Freedom from the point of view of ethics is not arbitrary. Not only logical construction, on which for given reason on equal rights work different actions. I want, I act that way, but work in a completely opposite way. Moral freedom of a personality consists of recognizing and fulfilling of duty. In front of himself and other people ‘the free will and will submitted under moral laws is one and the same.’’ (F174).
|
19. Moral freedom of a personality.
Gulyga in Kant’s manner: Moral freedom of a personality consists of recognizing and fulfilling of duty. (07020104) |
|
07020105
|
What is genuine freedom according to Schelling?The position of Schelling in many respects is similar to Kant’s. ‘Man is evil or good, writes A.A. Guliga, explaining the position of Schelling, not accidentally, his free will is predetermined. Judas gave Christ voluntarily, but he could not behave differently. Man behaves according to his character, but character is not chosen. You cannot avoid destiny! The dogm of free choice by Schelling is called ‘plague for moral’. Moral cannot appeace on such a shaky basis as personal will, as personal will or decision. The basis of moral is the recognition of the necessity of definite behavior. ‘On this I stand and cannot others’. In words of Luther recognizing himself as being carried by destiny, picture of moral consciousness. A genuine freedom consists in accordance of necessity. Freedom and necessity. Freedom and necessity exist in each other’ (F175) In another place A.A. Guliga so explains the position of Schelling: ‘The process of creation is self restriction by God. (‘Master is shown in the skill to restrict oneself’, Schelling cites Goethe). Does this happen on free will by God? Does this mean that the world came to existence accidentally? No, it does not mean: the absolute will is presented by absolute necessity, of a choice at free expression of will cannot be any question. The problem of choice emerges where doubt exists, where the will is not clear, and consequently, not free. Who knows, what him is needed, works, is free’. (F176) In the ’system of transcendental idealism’ Schelling reasoned about movement of society to whole world citizenship regime, spoke of mutually intertwined free action of people with historical necessity (as then spoke also Hegel, and K. Marx with F. Engels): Man, although free in the relationship of his immediate acts, but results, to which they lead in the framework of scope, depends on necessity, standing on he actor and participating even in the unwrapping of the freedom itself’. A. Guliga comments: ‘We are acting completely freely, in full consciousness, but as a result in form of nonconsciousness emerges something that never was in our minds’. Hegel mentions a similar combination of ‘cleverness of mind’» (F177). In the book ’On the method of unversity education’ Schelling speaks of the meaning of necessity in history: ‘In history, as in drama, events flow by necessity from preceding and are not understood empirically, but thanks to higher order of things. Empirical reasons satisfy reason, for the reason history exists only then, when in it there are instruments and means of higher necessity.’ He also confirmed that in a complete government necessity is intertwined with freedom.
|
20. Free will is predetermined.
Schelling: A genuine freedom consists in accordance of necessity. (07020105) |
|
07020106
|
And this is the opinion of Hegel about freedom and necessity: |
|
07020107
|
What is the Hegelian view of freedom?’… but genuine, spirit is concrete, and its definitions are both freedom and necessity. This way highest understanding consists of soul being free in its necessity and only in it finds its freedom, equally as in, on the opposite, its necessity is produced only in its freedom. Only here is more difficult for us to assume unity, than in objects of nature. But freedom may be also abstract freedom without necessity; this false freedom is arbitrary, and it is just because of this contrary to itself, unconscious connection, empty opinion about freedom, formal freedom’ (F178).
|
21. ... soul being free in its necessity...
(07020107) |
|
07020108
|
Other philosophers, on the contrary, put the concept of freedom against the concept necessity and thus approach it with the concept of randomness, arbitrariness. |
22. Randomness, arbitrariness.
(07020108) |
|
07020109
|
When is a man free according to Herbert J. Muller?American philosopher Herbert J. Muller writes, for instance: ‘Speaking simply, man is free to the extent that he may on his own will choose a business or withdraw from it, make his own decisions, answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to any question or call and, being led by his own reasoning decide about duty and worthy goal. He is not free as far as he is deprived of the possibility of following his propensities, but on the use of direct violence or of the fear of consequences is obliged to behave against his own wishes, at which these wishes do not play role, these wishes being him utile or harmful.’ (F179).
|
23. Speaking simply...
Herbert J. Muller: Man is free to the extent that he may on his own will choose a business or withdraw from it. (07020109) |
|
07020110
|
’I do what I want’. What does Hegel say about that?A similar concept of freedom (according to the priciple of ’I do what I want’) we will find in the German philosophical dictionary (F180), and in ‘Short philosophic’ (F181). Hegel in this connection justly remarked: ‘When we hear that freedom consists of the possibility to do whatever we want, we can accept such assumption as complete absence of reasoning culture’ (F182).
|
|
07020111
|
What does prison aphorist say about freedom?And here a sharp remark from the collection of prison aphorists: do what you want, but so that it does not deprive you this possibility in the future.
|
24. Prison aphorists.
(07020111) |
|
07020112
|
Randomness of freedom in Marxist philosophy?Very complicated, of course, is it to recognize the presence of freedom of both moments: randomness and necessity. the reasoning mind is fighting within the limits of ‘or’. In the Marxist philosophy, in spite of the fact that all considered themselves as dialecticians, existed some randomness at the valuation and characteristics of freedom. This is what, for instance, I.V. Bychko has written:
|
25. In the Marxist philosophy.
(07020112) |
|
07020113
|
‘The existence of randomness… confirms one or the other of the leading representatives of American naturalism C. Lamont, gives birth to the freedom of choice, although also does not guarantee that it is really occurring.’ (C. Lamont. Freedom of Choice Affirmed. N.Y. 1967, p. 62). Depriving (or at least not exaggeratedly) freedom on randomness, Lamont in this basis completely in the spirit of materialism of 18th century puts the freedom against the determinism’ (F183). |
|
07020114
|
The presented quotation from the writings of C. Lamont does not contain that he ascribes it to I.V. Bychko. Included into it the idea of randomness is completely justified. However paradoxical it is, but freedom necessarily presupposes ran-domness, it is not possible without it. Already Aristotle remarked that denial of real existence of randomness brings with it denial of the possibility of choice in practical action, that it is absurd. The destruction of random occurrence, he wrote, brings with it stupid consequences… If the phenomena do not have randomness, then there is no reason to consult, nor act as if it were so, then this will happen, but if otherwise, then that’ (F184). |
26. Aristotle:
If the phenomena do not have randomness, then there is no reason to consult, nor act as if it were so, then this will happen, but if otherwise, then that’. (07020114) |
|
07020115
|
Hegel: a ‘veritable and reasonable concept of freedom includes...' (What?)Some of our philosophers literally ‘cycled’ with the formula ‘freedom is recognized necessity’. Among others Hegel himself, if we take all his statements about freedom, did not understand so simply this category. He essentially admitted that freedom includes both moments: randomness and inavoidability. So in Small logics (§ 145) he speaks of bare arbitrariness as will in form of randomness. On the other hand, he does not deny that genuinely free will includes in itself arbitrariness (will ‘includes in it random in form of arbitrary, but includes it only as a ‘taken’ moment’). In another place of Small logics (§182) he wrote that a ‘veritable and reasonable concept of freedom includes in itself the necessity as given’. This way, to Hegel ascribed view that freedom is a recognized necessity is finally only half truth, which searches complicated and versatile presentation of the German thinker about freedom.
|
27. Randomness and inavoidability.
Hegel: ‘veritable and reasonable concept of freedom includes in itself the necessity as given’. (07020115) |
|
070202 |
On a so called paradox of freedom |
|
07020201
|
What is the paradox of freedom?K. Popper describes this paradox in the following way: “The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato.” (F185)
|
28. Paradox of freedom.
(07020201) |
|
07020202
|
What makes the paradox of freedom a paradox?In another place K. Popper writes: “This paradox (of freedom – L.B.) may be formulated in the following way: unrestrained freedom leads to its opposite, as far as without defense and restriction from the part of the law freedom unavoidably leads to the tyranny of strong over weak. This paradox in unclear form settled by Rousseau, was solved by Kant, who required that freedom of everybody be limited, but not beyond the frames which are necessary to provide even freedom to all’ (F186).
|
29. ... limited, but not beyond ...
(07020202) |
|
07020203
|
What follows if freedom is understood only in a negative sense, as to what must be limited?As we see, K. Popper follows I. Kant in understanding the paradox of freedom. Between them already Hegel criticized the mentioned thesis of Kant. He wrote: ‘…there is nothing more widely spread than the conception that everybody must limit his freedom in relation to everybody else, that the government is the construction of this mutual restriction and laws the essence ot these limitations. In such conceptions, continues he the criticism, freedom is understood only as an accidental caprice and arbitrary rule’ (F187). As a matter of fact, if freedom is understood only in a negative sense, as to what must be limited, it unavoidably approaches to caprice and arbitrary rule.
|
|
07020204
|
What is clarified by the example of 'freedom to wave hands of one person ends, where the nose of other person begins'?Just exactly this kind of understanding of freedom exists in the famous French legend. In it it is told about a lawcourt decision over a man, who having waved by hands, accidentally stroke nose of another person. The accused justified himself by saying that nobody can limit his freedom to wave with his own hands. The court decision in this respect sounded: the accused is guilty, because the freedom to wave hands of one person ends, where the nose of other person begins.
|
30. Freedom is a net.
Freedom of one person to wave by hand ends where nose of another begins. (07020204) |
|
07020205
|
As far as this conception is spread, it may be assessed from the fact that N.U. Senkevich at the entry to the position of general director of the telecanal NTV announced on the press conference 20030125: ‘Personally I guarantee that there will be no limiting of the freedom of word on the NTV canal’. This is a populistic and utopistic announcement. |
|
07020206
|
What about freedom without internal limitations?Freedom, any freedom is without limitations. Therefore from the very beginning insolvent and simply senseless is the question about limiting or not limiting the freedom. More correct is to pose the question about the quality and quantity of limiting, as they influence the freedom and in what relationship they are to directly opposite actions, allowing of different kinds. Because freedom of everybody of us not only is limited in the society but also allowed. In other words, not only mutual limitation of freedom, but also mutual allowance of freedom takes place. In this essential is the order of rights. In this is also the regulating role of the government. Above I also said: of the mutual restriction of freedom emanate manifold obligations of man; from the mutual allowance of freedom emanates a not less manifold of rights of man. Hegel, disputing with Kant , is against the conception of the illimitation of freedom (that it may be not limited). He justly proposes that there are limitations, internally inherent to freedom. Freedom without internal limitations is no freedom, but arbitrary rule.
|
31. Freedom without internal limitations.
Freedom without internal limitations is no freedom, but arbitrary rule. (07020206) |
|
07020207
|
Does the paradox of freedom really exist? If not, why?And so, as a matter of fact, there is no paradox of freedom, because unlimited, absolute freedom does not exist (wilfulness, arbitrariness are no freedom; and even they have their limits). Real freedom is always limited from inside as well as from outside (from inside: internal necessity, circumstances; external: requirements and duty). And that what as a result of free elections in power may come tyran or dictator (as it was in 1933 in Germany), speaks only of the fact that freedom itself gives no absolute guarantee of self-defence. Freedom always involves a risk in itself, among others the extreme risk of destroying itself. Freedom is this possibility, but possibility may include in itself also denial.
|
32. Does the paradox exist?
There is no paradox of freedom, because unlimited, absolute freedom does not exist. (07020207) |
|
07020208
|
(As to the absolute guarantee of something it may be said: it does not exist in principle! May it concern freedom, security, success, winning, long life etc.) |
|
070203 |
Freedom as a possibility of choice |
|
07020301
|
In what way is the choice of profession a good example of the two moments of the concept of freedom?Rather widely spread is the conception about freedom as possibility to choose. Also this is completely justified. In this concept of freedom sharply may be seen the presence of both contrary moments: randomness and necessity. We shall scrutiny this in a concrete example. The choice of profession is in life an important problem for practically everybody. It contains two moments. The necessary moment is the person become of age, and must determine in the question of choice of the profession in order to realize himself, here there is no choice.
|
33. Choice of profession.
The necessary moment is the person become of age, and must determine in the question of choice of the profession in order to realize himself, here there is no choice. (07020301) |
|
07020302
|
A random moment is the choice of just this and not some other profession, speciality depending on random circumstances (place, time etc.) or randomness of will. |
|
07020303
|
Organic union of necessity and randomness in the choice of profession takes place, when this choice of profession is effectuated by vocation. |
34. Organic union of necessity and randomness.
(07020303) |
|
07020304
|
What are the socially necessary and internally necessary moments in the choice of profession?Furthermore, it is possible to see, that necessary moment of choice finds its expression in two categories: category of necessity and category of duty. (moral responsibility). Category of necessity expresses personally necessary moment of choice (a person needs, experiences persistent need into some kind of action or to some kind of object, which he may ‘obtain’ only by working). Category of duty (responsibility) is expressed in socially necessary moment of choice (a person is obliged to, must work, labor in order not to be good-for-nothing, dependant, parasite). And need, and duty are internally necessary for the person. Only need goes from biological mechanisms of regulation of behavior, but duty from social mechanisms.
|
|
07020305
|
Responsibility as an expression of necessity in freedom. In what case can it deny the freedom?(By the way on the freedom and responsibility. In the first place, not all questions of freedom and necessity must lead to the problem of mutual relationships of freedom and responsibility. The latter is only one of the expressions of necessity. Secondly, not in all cases of freedom is organically connected with responsibility, so to say, friends with it. There are such forms of responsibility, which make a person unfree. For instance, responsibility for crime and evil deed, responsibility of theft, serfdom, prisoner. This way, there is responsibility that denies freedom in one or another relationship.)
|
35. Responsibility that denies freedom.
(07020305) |
|
07020306
|
Choice of profession by vocation just unites both necessary moments: personally meaningful and socially meaningful. |
|
07020307
|
To this necessary moments of choice correspond two random moments: subjective – randomness of desire and objective: randomness of circumstances, conditions, etc. (for instance, randomness of birth, confluence of conditions). |
|
07020308
|
Under randomness of desire |
36. Sympathies and antipathies limiting the free choice.
(07020308) |
|
07020309
|
In freedom as the possibility to choose sharply are distinguished subjective and objective moments. |
37. Subjective and objective.
(07020309) |
|
07020310
|
From objective side the possibility of choice means that there is of which to choose. Objective possibilities of choice are rather versatile. |
|
07020311
|
In olden times the freedom was counterpositioned to serfdom. Free was who was not slave is said in the Evangelium of St John (8, 33). Seemingly with this concept of freedom operates also Aristotle when he wrote: ‘free is considered the person who lives on his own, and not for others’ (F189). It is curious, that almost in the same way characterizes freedom also Hegel: ‘freedom consists precisely of it that no absolutely other, but I depend on contents, which is myself’ (F190). |
38. Freedom vs. serfdom.
(07020311) |
|
07020312
|
And look what kind of ideas expressed a prisoner on life in freedom: ‘People in freedom and they do not understand what it means: go on the earth where and how it to yourself pleases, expecting commandments and not serving according to them. |
39. Life of prisoner.
(07020312) |
|
07020313
|
Has a prisoner a right to choose?People in freedom do not appreciate still another great privilege – right to choose, which is completely deprived from a slave, prisoner; from the dictionary of free people the word ‘or’, their actions are not subjected to other people nor to bad will’ (F191). A person goes from prison to freedom. This means, that in front of him a mass of possibilities to live normally, in a human manner, is opened. Usually in front of a person are open broad possibilities to realize himself, to act according to his wishes and needs.
|
40. No right to choose.
(07020313) |
|
070204 |
The ability to choose |
|
07020401
|
From the subjective side the possibility to choose means ability to choose. A person, in spite of huge possibilities, which he has may turn out unable to choose. This happens either by ignorance, or by weakness of senses, will, or as a consequence of the lack of skill. |
41. Subjective ability.
(07020401) |
|
07020402
|
What is the role of independence in the ability to choose?People possess different degrees and different kinds of abilities to choose. Probably, general ability to choose is expressed in the concept of ‘independence’. The greater the ability ot choose (quantitatively and qualitatively) a person has, the more he is independent (other conditions remaining unchanged).
|
42. Independence.
(07020402) |
|
07020403
|
The ability to choose is possessed not only by people, but also by animals and in general living organisms. True, for the simplest living organisms, monocellulars, this ability is minimal. They may only perform choice between food and no food. According to the measure of complication and development of organisms their ability to choose grows. The simplest organisms and plants (F192), for instance cannot choose the environment of living, but animals can do it. Animals maintain, as a rule, active search of favorable environment. |
43. Animals and the ability to choose.
Animals maintain, as a rule, active search of favorable environment. (07020403) |
|
07020404
|
Unable to choose are inorganic bodies (christal, stones, planets etc.). This is understandable. They do not have any activity. Their ‘behavior’ completely is determined either by necessity (for example, movement around sun), or randomness (for example, movement of dust in the air), or probability – a middle position between necessity and randomness. |
44. Unability to choose.
(07020404) |
|
07020405
|
The ability to choose is determined higher as a subjective moment of freedom. In its turn it is divided in two moments: conscious and voluntary (naturally, we mean human ability to choose). |
45. Conscious and voluntary.
(07020405) |
|
07020406
|
'Seven times measure, once cut' What has this statement to do with ability to choose?Conscious moment of the ability to choose means that a person is able to reason, ‘weigh’, calculate before he takes the decision about some alternative of action, that is, he is able to act ‘knowing the matter’. Here is valid the rule: ‘seven times measure, once cut’. Leibnitz has written: ‘already Aristotle successfully noticed that free action we are calling not only those which are spontaneous, but also additionally are reasoned.’ (F193). Leibnitz had in mind that place in ’Nikomachean ethics’ where Aristotle detailedly treats the question of what such conscious choice is. Compare the German proverb: "Wer die Wahl hat, hat die Qual (Who chooses, also has the headache). It is a right context to quote also the famous word of the Evangelium of St. John (8:32): ‘and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free’ (I also have a similar saying: ‘the more objective view of a person on things, the more independent he is from them’). Of course, these sayings are unilateral, but they sharpen the idea and this way compel thinking.
|
46. Conscious weighing.
Balashov: ‘the more objective view of a person on things, the more independent he is from them’ (07020406) |
|
07020407
|
Why is information necessary, but by not sufficient condition of freedom to act?Interesting is the reasoning of V.E. Shlapentoh about the connection of freedom and knowledge (information): ‘Freedom to act and possibility to take decision appear only then when there is a possibility to choose among different alternatives of behavior’. In this the concept of ‘freedom’ in principle can be quantified: freedom the ‘more’, the more there is alternatives to choose… Knowledge of different alternatives of behavior is a necessary condition of the existence of ‘freedom’ for individual and for group. In the opposite case takes place the ‘freedom in itself’. In fact, the more information the student has of the existing professions, client of the existing goods etc, the higher degree of freedom in their action have. Of this such a connection of the concept of freedom with the category of information: although apparent that the information is necessary, but by no means sufficient condition of freedom. If an individual is exactly informed that in all movie theatres of the town is shown only one movie, the freedom of choise is not increased because of this information’ (F194).
|
47. Freedom and knowledge.
Knowledge of different alternatives of behavior is a necessary condition of the existence of ‘freedom’ for individual and for group. (07020407) |
|
07020408
|
What has the Buridan donkey to do with free choice?Volitional moment of ability to choose means that a person is able to make decision on some alternative of action inspite of insufficient information, experience or time for reasoning. The ability to volitional choice, decision allows also to avoid situations of Buridan donkey. In philosophic parables called Buridan, a donkey died being not able to decide of which of two heystacks it shoud eat. It could not solve the task of preferring one of two even possibilities.
|
48. Buridan donkey.
A donkey died being not able to decide of which of two heystacks it shoud eat. (07020408) |
|
07020409
|
What are conscious and volitional moments of ability?In real life people have conscious and volitional moments of ability to choose not always equally expressed or developed. Some people may have a better expressed conscious moment of ability to choose. They reason well and much, ‘measure’, calculate, but sometimes are not able to decide in the final choice or clothe teir choice, decision in cautious, not always clear, strict formulations. Some people may have more expressive volitional moment of ability to choose. Careful reasoning, weighing they clearly prefer volitional approach, set hopes on happy chance and even on ‘maybe’.
|
49. Conscious and volitional.
(07020409) |
|
07020410
|
Rational and irrational decision making - what do they mean?On the basis of volitional, voluntary decisions lies the randomness of choice, when the cup of ‘will effort’ clearly weighs more than the reasoning, ‘measuring’. Reasoning and ‘measuring’ are based on cognition and taking into account of all aspects of reality and possibility, that is, not only randomness, nonorderliness, but also necessity, regularity, orderliness. A person making volitional decision, consciously on unconsciously, absolutizes the moment of randomness, nonorderliness and underestimates the moment of necessity, regularity. Just here is the connection of philosophy of voluntarism with irrationalism. In knowing the essential role plays the search and opening of regularities that circumstances are managing. Irrationalism is the enemy of that kind of knowledge. Here voluntarism and irrationalism meet. They both are absolutizing one ability of thinking, intuition, and underestimate or deny the other, directly opposite ability of thinking, logics, reasoning. This latter ability to a greater extent than the former, is oriented to thinking and recognizing of the objective necessity, regularity, orderliness. Intuition is instead mainly oriented to taking into account and using objective randomness, nonorderliness of the reality.
|
50. Voluntarism and irrationalism meet.
In knowing the essential role plays the search and opening of regularities that circumstances are managing. Irrationalism is the enemy of that kind of knowledge. (07020410) |
|
07020411
|
This is what B.A. Abchuk writes about the importance of balanced approach to conscious and volitional aspects of free choice: |
51. Conscious and volitional aspects of free choice.
(07020411) |
|
07020412
|
‘In the schema of leading the treatment of information is combined with choosing of certain operation model. This choice of model of action on the basis of treatment of information is also decision making. The decision is the basis of management, its heart beat… |
|
07020413
|
Making decision, the modern pilot, engineer, economist aside of quantitative results of calculations must also take into account a great quantity of circumstances and considerations of quanlitative character, not giving an unambiguous answer. And, as a rule, the result is that in similar conditions it may work this, but maybe also that way. But life compels to do something, go to a completely defined, one only decision. There you may not avoid it without choice, which requires in addition to skill of calculation still also volitional qualities. |
|
07020414
|
… Jean Buridan invented an amusing parable about donkey, which died of hunger, because it could not decide between two similar stacks of hay, laid by its master. The trist history of Buridan donkey is the best illustration of what may happen, if at the decision to be made, the will is absent. In this light it becomes understandable on the fist glance the aphorism ‘Better one bad decision than two good’… |
52. What was the Buridan donkey missing?
The trist history of Buridan donkey is the best illustration of what may happen, if at the decision to be made, the will is absent. (07020414) |
|
07020415
|
Necessity and importance of volitional beginning of decision are obvious. But a ‘will’ tuned manager beware of another kind of danger, no less terrible, than that which killed the poor donkey, the danger of making decision on the basis of the volitional act, of depriving his choice on solid reasonableness. A similar action has even special scientific name – ‘voluntarism’… |
|
07020416
|
So, in the word ‘decided’, side by side with the academic ‘seems possible’ must be heard also metallically sounding note ‘so be it’. All that matters is the just proportion of ‘academic’ and ‘metallic’. What should be this important mutual relationship? Half and half? One to two?... |
|
07020417
|
Answer to this question you will not find in one text book – for each decision the proportion must be its own. Nevertheless, a certain general regularity may be explained by ‘seven times measure, once cut’ (7:1), not vice versa. For the beginning of the calculation, ‘measure’, there is an obvious preference. So, however, we will act with you, respected reader, when life compels us to decide. We will try to keep the indomitable desire to ‘cut’ at once, without any calculations, going from the so-called common sense or decide simply ‘on a glance’. |
|
07020418
|
Volitional action presupposes preliminary cognition of the aim and means of action, mental discussion of the grounds, saying ‘pro’ and ‘contra’ for its fulfilling. |
|
07020419
|
The decision is not a proof of mathematical theorem or getting an answer of mathematical problem, because here is no volitional element, the answer is unambiguous, in this sense an expression ‘solving an arithmetic problem’ is not exact). On the other hand, decision is not either a purely volitional act: volitiona effort completes the grounded choice, calculation. |
|
07020420
|
As a rule, the decision presupposes choice with participation of will of one of some possible alternatives of action’ (F195). |
|
070205 |
Formula of freedom |
|
07020501
|
According to definition freedom is a mutual enabling of randomness and necessity. It can be presented with a formula: |
|
07020502
|
F1 = ( N - [ F - N ) - F ] |
53. Formula of freedom.
(07020502) |
|
07020503
|
Which elements does the formula of freedom comprise?here:(N-F-N) is the enabling of necessity by randomness;
[F-N-F] is the enabling of randomness by freedom;
F1 is freedom of first degree (not to be confused with ‘degrees of freedom’, used in mechanics, physics and some other sciences!)
|
|
07020504
|
Freedom of 1st degree being the simplest living organisms (monocellular), enabling the independent existence. |
|
07020505
|
According to the measure of complication and perfection of living organisms, in width and in depth, becomes the freedom of their behavior more complicated, that is, increases their freedom. (In empirical level it is expressed particularly in the increase of the degrees of freedom (F196). The most complicated and perfect organism is the human organism, having 600 muscles and at least 250 degrees of freedom!). On the categorially logical level the increase of the degree of freedom is expressed in the deepening of mutual enabling of necessity and randomness. This deepening may be presented with jumps or stairs. To the freedom of 1st, 2nd , 3rd etc. degrees correspond different discrete levels of mutual enabling. Below see diagram of ‘Levels (depth) of mutually enabling necessity and randomness’. The higher the degree of freedom, the deeper layers of necessity and randomness it ‘conquers’ as a result of mutual enabling of these counterpositioned phenomena. |
54. Freedom is increasing with complication of organism.
The most complicated and perfect organism is the human organism, having 600 muscles and at least 250 degrees of freedom! (07020505) |
|
07020506
|
Freedom in human society carries rather complicated character. Of what degree it is, is difficult to say. Research is needed. |
|
07020507
|
 |
|
07020508
|
If led by the most general considerations, then we may assume, that man possesses a freedom of no less than 7th degree or still higher. As a matter of fact, if we assume that the simplest living organisms (monocellulars) possess freedom of 1st degree, polycellular plant organisms freedom of 2nd degree, animals freedom of 3th-6th (invertebrate, vertebrate cold-blooded, vertebrate warm-blooded carrying eggs, milk-feeding or live birth), then man must possess no less than 7th degrees. |
|
07020509
|
This way, the birth of living nature and human society may be imagined as a progression in the matter of freedom, that is, as a consequent emergence from freedom of first degree to freedom of second, higher degrees. |
|
07020510
|
How to understand mutual enabling of necessity and randomness? We will try to make it clear with examples close to us, that is, with examples taken of the life of man. We must only take into account that enabling these do not become as unambiguous as on the level of 1st degree. Because, if in the last case the mutual enabling of necessity and randomness appear as if spontaneous (either [N-F-N] or [F-N-F]), then in the framework of freedom owned by man this mutual enabling becomes not nonenabling, but multipliedly enabling, as if mutually enabling in cubic or in fourth or fifth degree. |
|
07020511
|
Therefore, in connection with great complication the mutual enabling of necessity and randomness in human society I intentionally shall present it in a simplified scheme [NFN] or [FNF]. |
|
07020512
|
What is meant by 'random discovery'?We shall scrutinize the first alternative: [FNF] enabling of randomness by necessity. We shall take the following example: In science is known a so called random discovery, when researchworker investigated something, but found something completely different. This history of discovery is the appearance of radioactivity by Henri Becquerel. Although this discovery is accidental, it would not have happened if it would not have been enabled by the necessity, and precisely by all knowledge, logics of thinking and direction of interest of the French scientist. Just before this discovery x-ray radiation was discovered. Henri Becquerel all time thought about this discovery, as the biographies, and this ‘thinking’ formed a special atmosphere for discoveries. At the background of ‘thinking’ also was done the discovery of radioactive radiation of uranium salts. This is how Eve Curie describes this discovery:
|
55. Discovery of radioactivity.
Example of accidental discovery. (07020512) |
|
07020513
|
’After discovery by Röntgen of X-rays Henri Poincaré decided to research, whether similar to X-rays of Röntgen were also the rays, which emerge from fluorescent particles under influence of light. Inspired by such task also Henri Becquerel researched uranium. But instead of the expected phenomenon he revealed another, completely perfect and unexplained: the salts of uranium independently, without preliminary influence on them of light emitted rays of unknown origin. Including uranium substance placed on photographic film turned to black paper, had an effect on firm also through the paper. X-rays and ‘uranium’ rays discharged the electroscope, transforming the surrounding air to conductor. |
|
07020514
|
Henri Becquerel was convinced that these properties did not depend on transitional radiation, but constantly appeared and then when they contained uranium substance maintained long time in darkness. He discovered the same phenomenon, which later got from Marie Curie the name of ‘radioactivity’’ (F197). |
|
07020515
|
Similar discoveries, even most accidental, do not come out as a matter of fact purely accidentally. They always are enabled by one or another necessary moments. Accident helps only a trained mind, said Louis Pasteur. Or: accident smiles to them who understands to use it (F198). |
|
07020516
|
We shall now examine the second alternative: [NFN], enabling of necessity by randomness. As the example we shall take the situation of the choice of profession. From the very beginning is given as the necessary condition of the grown-up life to work, labor, choose that or other profession. This inavoidability of the choice is made possible by accidental preconditions or circumstances. The same may be said about the choice of lover, intended husband. He from the beginning set as necessary condition of the grown-up life. On the other hand, this choice appears as choice conditioned by a multitude of random occurrences. In matters of love a big role plays His Excellency the Accident and not only in the negative sense, but also in positive. Accident is a kind of midwife, helping the birth of love. Such role accident plays also in art. This is what wrote for instance Alexander Green: ‘Irreproachable purity exists of characteristic movements, which can completely be pictured in lines or in drawings. This is the thing also in life, that gives the beginning to art. A genuine case is hammered in impeccable simplicity of naturally true sound, which we expect on each pace by all heart, always full of enchantment. So some, but so fully sounds then the impression’ (‘Krysolov’)[LB8] |
|
07020517
|
What is ment by the problem of 'hint'?From the point of view of analysis of the problem of enabling interesting is this form of behavior: the hint or allusion. In this form of behavior element of randomness is used consciously. Hint may be understood, but may also not be understood. Correspondingly it may stay without answer. He who makes hint, would like that it is understood by other or others. But on the other hand he allows that the hint may not be understood and consequently that what he wants may not occur. For instance a girl hints to a boy about her feelings and desires. On the basis of this her behavior lies a need, that is, necessity. But by the form of her behavior carries the character of play, one of the phenomena, which is ment by hint, specially constructed accident.
|
56. The problem of hint.
(07020517) |
|
070206 |
Dependence and independence |
|
07020601
|
How do you understand the heading 'Development gives independence.'?Above I have spoken about the emergence of living nature and human society as a consequent ascent of freedom of one degree to that of two degrees, and further to higher degrees. But progress in the matter of freedom may be imagined also as movement from dependence to independence, from greater dependence to smaller dependence. Man as living creature in the matter of freedom is unconditionally more independent from surrounding environment than animals. Modern man is more independent of it than original people. Exiting to outer space and conquering it he started even to overcome the gravitation of earth (By the way, the exit to outer space is a fact by which man solved the problem superior to all others, what living nature could do on Earth).
|
57. Development gives independence.
(07020601) |
|
07020602
|
Dependence and independence are still two dialectic mutually opposite sides of freedom. |
58. Mutually opposite sides of freedom.
(07020602) |
|
07020603
|
So, a child at early age is maximally dependent of parents. In mature age man is minimally dependent and correspondingly maximally independent of parents. |
|
07020604
|
Describe connection between individual and society!Dependence may not be unambiguously connected with necessity, and necessity not with randomness. The dependence of child of his parents contains in itself as an element necessity (of forming favorable conditions for life and development), so also element of randomness (for instance, dependensce of caprices, errors, carelessness of parents, their ignorance and lack of skill). Or another example. Man is by thousands of fibres connected to society, in full sense of the word ‘lives in the society’. And dependence of man of the society is not only his dependence of manyfaced social necessity in moral, juridical, economic, political sense, but also dependence of random occurrences of social changes, conflicts, shocks, of random occurrences of birth, and education in the given society at the given historical epoch.
|
59. Man is by thousands of fibres connected to society.
(07020604) |
|
07020605
|
Is exit to the outer space a realistic alternative?So also the independence may be consequence not only of subjective or objective random occurrence, but also of subjective or objective necessity. Even that exit of man into the outer space, overcoming the gravitation of the Earth is a result of many factors, among others such as logics of scientific and technical progress. Or the behavior of man in circumstances exceptionally dangerous for him. Such subjective necessity as thirst of life is here always at service.
|
60. Exit of man into the outer space.
(07020605) |
|
07020606
|
The mutual relationship dependence-independence expresses degree of freedom (and, correspondingly, of nonfreedom) of subject in relation to another, to object. |
|
07020607
|
Effort to ever greater freedom. How can it be a problem?Man, as long as living, is always free, is a free creature. He is originally in possession of a minimum amount of freedom simply as a living creature. But at the same time in man is hidden an effort to a greater freedom, an unrestricted effort, at that. From this emanate all the problems.
|
|
07020608
|
What kind of freedom could a slave have in a society based on slavery, for instance in ancient Rome, in America of the beginning of 1800's?When we speak of nonfreedom, slavery, serfdom, then it is not necessary to understand it in the sense of complete absence of freedom. Even in the most shameful circumstances man possesses a minimum of freedom, above all, ability to choose. This exactly allows him to struggle for liberation, for widening of freedom.
|
|
07020609
|
* * * |
|
07020610
|
As we see, the concept of freedom is always complicated, manifold; of one side, exceptionally wide, but of another, completely concrete. Correspondingly also liberalism is rather complicated, historically developing stream of social thinking. What is seen as liberalism, its partisans or opponents are sometimes rather far of its real meaning. One must constantly check the subjective view on liberalism with a natural concept of freedom and be ready to correct this view. |
|
07020611
|
Unconditionally, liberalism, once born, develops according to how its framework of social and other freedom widens, how people resolve the tasks of progress of the matter of freedom. |
|
|
|
Message to authors
|
|
|
|
| 00 |
01 |
02 |
03 |
04 |
05 |
06 |
07 |
08 |
09 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
|
|