Freedom: what is it?

[Ezra]

I think freedom is the ability to do what ever you want to as long as that does not infringe on others doing the same. Or causes harm to others.

a person should be free to do as they wish unless the use that freedom to infringe on others rights to life liberty and happiness.

For instance if I own property I should be able to build a house put in septic and build shops and so on with out asking for permission or having to get a permit.

A permit is like a fine punishing a person for not doing anything wrong.

Just like gun control it Only punishes those who obey the law. Not the criminals.

The law system does not really punish criminals the correct way either.

If someone has stolen my property. The criminal does not have to make restitution. They are instead put in jail where I would then have to pay for them to be there through taxes. I get stolen from twice.

If someone has used their freedom to take away others freedom or rights. They should have to pay a restitution. And if they choose not too.

They are outlawed. Meaning the law no longer protects them. and anyone can do anything to them and nothing done to them can be brought up against those who did it in a court of law.

Laws are meant to protect those who follow them. And they don't protect those who don't.

Laws are not meant to punish those who follow them. (Taxation permits and so on. And feed and house and provide for those who don't. (Jail /prison).

[2ndRateMind]

Judging by some of the comments in various threads on this forum, it seems to me that freedom, though frequently referred to here, is not well defined.
Something will often be labeled as anti-freedom, or an erosion of freedom, or an attack on freedom etc, whether we're talking church, government, taxes, the cost of living, foreign countries, law, education, and so on. In other words freedom tends to be defined by what it isn't.

So, what is it?

And if it really exists is it absolute, or a balance of various rights or privileges?

If it isn't absolute, at what point does freedom cease to be freedom and become something else?

I look forward to your replies.

My go-to thinker on this topic, Isaiah Berlin, considered that human projects, desires, motives and ambitions were divergent, rather than convergent. What I want to do and achieve in my life might well be inconsistent with what you want to do with yours, (say for example, we both want to be president, or dominate the same industry, or become the most adored popular musician).

If this is so (and I do not think it is, necessarily) then 'freedom' might be considered as the opportunity and capacity to develop my projects, and satisfy my desires, motives and ambitions, without hindrance from others, or the state. We value 'freedom', then, because of this divergence, this incompatibility between all our goals, and desire to be left alone to do as we will, because others inherently interfere with them. And when we are so left alone, we call that 'freedom'.

But I think these human projects, desires, motives and ambitions can be reconciled. The way to reconcile them, as Jesus thought 2000 years ago, is to transcend them with Christian love, so that we each and all want what is best for each and all. And for me, true freedom lies not in pursuing our own selfish ends, free from interference, but in pursuing the common good, free from interference. Any other route to freedom carries within it the seeds of frustration.

Finally, it is said that God's service is perfect freedom. That sounds paradoxical, but it is nevertheless true, that good people of any faith and none, want only to do what God wants, and designed, them to do.

Best wishes, 2RM.