FREEDOM: HOW FREE IS FREE?

A Concept Paper

Submitted to:
Prof. IRMA R. TAN

Submitted by:
MARC JOSEPH T. LOYOLA
Comm2 – B1

January 28, 2010

 One of the most frequent issues which strikes every democratic country and is still
unresolved is the issue on freedom. Democracy is a kind of government in which people are said
to be free. It is where freedom exists in the form of rights of the people. For example, people
have the right of speech, wherein people can make known their opinions and preferences
regarding the government. Such freedom is an important element for a government to be called a
democratic one. However, it is not always the case. The privileged few who hold the power and
sit in the high ranking positions impose rules and regulations or use their authoritative power to
make things happen, which would, most probably, suppress the people’s rights and their freedom
(Fromm, 1991). However, the main point here is not democracy but understanding freedom
itself.
More than anything else, it would be necessary for a person to grasp the meaning of
something which he or she has but unconscious if he or she still has it until it is lost – freedom.
The word was formed by combining the root word free and the suffix –dom. The word free
originally meant “beloved” or “dear one.” Accordingly, in another definition from the Old
English, free came from the word freo, which meant “exempt from” or “not in bondage” from
which the present definitions of the word freedom was derived. Moreover, the suffix -dom is
combined with different words to form nouns which refer to domain as in kingdom, collection of
persons as in officialdom, rank or station as in earldom, or general conditions as in freedom
(Etymonline.com, 2010). From these, it can be inferred that freedom is a condition or state of
being free from constraints. It may sound as plain as this but a greater complexity is implied
behind the numerous definitions of the word.
One thing that makes it difficult to understand is that freedom is a concept, not a percept
(Landry, 2006). It is not just a mere product of human’s perception with a full understanding of
what it is but it is an idea that evolved from the people’s analysis of their situation. Freedom,
sometimes interchanged with liberty, is often used to refer to independence especially by the
people who were ones colonized or were under control of a powerful individual like the
Philippines. For the less fanciful, freedom means exemption or release from slavery or
imprisonment. It may also mean an exemption from arbitrary, despotic, or autocratic control, for
short, independence as it was mentioned earlier. Accordingly, it is the state of being able to act or
not to act according as we shall choose. For some, it may mean being able to do what he or she
wants but it is a wrong perception (123HelpMe.com, 2010).
 Freedom is something more than the things mentioned earlier. In search for its true
essence, different people came up with different philosophies to better understand the meaning of
freedom. The late US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, in one of his speeches, proclaimed the
freedom of men or the four different freedoms of humans. First of which is the freedom of
speech and expression. The words themselves denote what kind of freedom this is. It means
people are free to express their opinions and what they have to say. As pointed out earlier, it is
one of the important elements that characterize a democratic country where the United States of
America is an example. In fact all other three are, as well, characteristics of a democratic
country. The second freedom is the freedom of belief. People are given rights to freely choose
their religion of their will. They possess the power to worship the god they chose to have faith in.
The third one is the freedom from want. It means an economic understanding that would benefit
the individual or groups of individual. Freedom from want is some kind of enlightenment which
would free the individual from disadvantages which wanting would bring. The last freedom
pointed out by Roosevelt is the freedom from fear. In other terms, it can be restated as freedom
from the thought or possibility of putting into harm or endangering one’s self. Like the freedom
from want, freedom from fear is interpreted as the understanding of situations which would free
the individuals involved and would get the most benefit. On a larger scale, freedom from fear can
be illustrated by a country’s endeavour to discern things and avoid harming its neighbouring
countries. This idea of Roosevelt was contested by some but it set the stage of what freedom is
(Crowley, 2001).
Furthermore, in the works cited by William Ebenstein (1972), Thomas Hobbes proposed
two liberties that an individual possessed. One of which is positive freedom and the other is
negative freedom. Similar idea was also presented by Isaiah Berlin when he drew out the
distinction between positive freedom and negative freedom. According to him, negative freedom
can be said as freedom from. On the other hand, positive freedom can be translated as freedom to.
An example of the former is freedom from oppression, freedom from marginalization, freedom
from poverty and the like. This means that negative freedom is liberation or being free from
something which may have been undesirable. In contrast, positive freedom is having the
freedom, ability, power, or autonomy to do something he or she wills. Positive freedom is
illustrated in examples like freedom to develop one’s potentials, freedom to speak, freedom to
choose his or her bet for presidency, freedom to live the kind of life he or she want, etc.
 Landry (2006) asserted that freedom is not a rigid physical thing. It is one that is
intangible and is not to be directly sensed. Instead, it is a concept or a mental construction which
cannot be described in exact and absolute terms. However it should be emphasized that the
precious right of freedom can only be possessed by an individual. It is not like a parcel of land
which many people share but it is something that a person has or not. It’s either a person has
freedom or not.
Indeed, there are a lot of definitions that talk about liberty and freedom. All of those can
be summarized as the absence of restraint (123HelpMe.com, 2010). However, other definitions
seem to be different from the common ones. Saint Thomas of Aquinas gave a different meaning
to freedom. He even showed how an individual can be liberated or freed even in the state of not
being free. It seems hard to understand but it’s not. He gave an example of slavery. During his
time, the Medieval time, slavery was still frequent. His philosophy about governance was
theocratic. The sovereign one mandated by God and slaves ought to obey their masters.
Technically, the slaves were not free. They have no rights to do what they want and they were
bound to follow their master’s orders. In this state of being unfree, slaves can be free by doing
their master’s orders for themselves and not for their masters. In this way, the slaves are no
longer obeying their master but their own will, thus they get their freedom (Ebenstein, 1972). In
addition, another definition is from Christian view. Freedom is viewed as liberation from. To
commit sin is to be a slave of sin and to be free is to follow Jesus, who is the Truth.
Freedom is not something that is gained through the efforts of shedding blood and tears
of one’s ancestors, rather, it is something with which every person is born. It comes with life’s
whole package. Jean Jacques Rousseau asserted that the condition of freedom was inherent to
humanity. At the moment an individual is born, he or she already possesses his or her freedom.
Jean-Paul Sartre even claimed that humans are condemned to be free. People always have
choices and this justifies what Sartre said (Landry, 2006).
It should be clear that freedom is not a measurable physical thing, that is, it cannot be
measured by any objective standard. It exists within humans from the point of birth up to the
very moment of his or her death. However, it only exists in different degrees. Freedom is in fact
fundamental to human life, as fundamental as the air one breathes: there is no excitement in its
experience but in its absence, misery comes. John Stuart Mill described freedom that the only
freedom which deserves its name is that or pursuing one own good in his or her own way so long
as he or she does not attempt to derive others their or impede their efforts to obtain it. It means
that freedom is limited and as mentioned, exists only to some degrees. Suarez (2009) noted that
there is no absolute freedom. If there is such, chaos is what’s going to follow. Rousseau even
took fame when he said that man is born free but everywhere he is in chains. A fish, for example,
is free to swim around in any body of water; however the freedom of the fish is only limited to
within the water. It is the same with the human freedom.
The question then is how to secure the greatest possible freedom for all. Man is given the
freedom to act according to his will so long as others rights are not violated. If other’s freedom
has been invaded, then it’s another story. Securing freedom can be done by restricting the
freedom of all by rules that preclude coercion by or of other people. This is where the
government comes in. Freedom depends upon the combination of the individual and his or her
environment (Bay, 1971). Thus, freedom depends on every government under which a person
lives. For short, the concept of freedom is relative to the notion of law.
It can then be concluded that freedom is a state of being, where an individual is the pilot
of himself, where he or she is free to put at stake his own life, time, and properties. His actions
cost his own benefits. In other words, one is bound to accept the consequences of his or her
actions. Equipped with freedom, he or she has the choice and he or she should pay for the choice
he or she made. With freedom comes great responsibility (123HelpMe.com, 2010). This is one
thing to be remembered by an individual who is free. It is important to note that results of one’s
actions do not only affect him or herself but it also affects the people around him or her.
On the other way around, there are still complex things which are to be understood about
freedom. Here is a situation whether or not a person is free. Suppose a man sleeps in side a room.
The door was locked while he was asleep, thus imprisoning him. The moment before he
awakens, the door was opened. The question is if he is free. This particular situation seems
complicated but it can be explained. The man was free to sleep and if he woke while the door
was locked, he was free to move about in the room but he was not free to leave. Situations like
these illustrate the complexity of the idea of freedom (Suarez, 2009).
It was pointed that freedom is the absence of constraint. It is the inherent ability
possessed from birth to do things of a person’s will, however freedom exists only on limited
degree and is relative to the circumstance. It only exists only in cases where the individual does
not invade the freedom of other persons. There is no absolute freedom.
References:
123HelpMe.com. 2010. Freedom and Responsibility. 2010, Jan 25.
<http://www.123HelpMe.co/view.asp?id=66393>.
123HelpMe.com. 2010. The Meaning of Freedom. 2010, Jan 25.
<http://www.123HelpMe.co/view.asp?id=15692>.
Answers.com. 2010. Freedom. 2010, Jan 25. <http://www.answers.com/topic/freedom>.
Bay, Christian. 1971. The Structure of Freedom. California: Stanford University Press.
Carter, Ian. 2007. Freedom. 2010, Jan 25.
<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberty_positive_negative/>.
Crowley, John. 2001. Four Freedoms. USA: HarperCollins.
Ebenstein, William. 1972. The Great Political Thinkers. New York: Avon Books.
Etymonline.com. 2010. Freedom. 2010, Jan 25. <http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?
search=free&searchmode=none>.
Fromm, Erich. 1991. Escape from Freedom. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Landry, Peter. 2006. On Liberty. 2010, Jan 25.
<http://www.blupete.com/Literature/Essays/BluePete/Liberty.htm>.
Suarez, Daniel. 2009. Freedom. New York: Penguin Group Inc.