|
|
|
Featured Papers from Rad Essays |
|
|
|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
Freedom is an elusive concept. ... The vigour of these debates is indicative of the highly subjective nature of freedom, and its’ ineluctable relationship with politics. However it seems that a failing with many of these academic experts, is that freedom has wrongly become their justificatory banner for each and every political system they happen to support. ...
The field of political science is in danger of repeating the religious mistake if political scientists continue to hijack broad philosophical concepts such as freedom to support the political systems they affiliate themselves with. And while there are plenty of offenders, Berlin, Benn and Weinstein among them, there is a refreshing school of thought led by McCallum trying do get at the theoretical core of freedom, “free” of any political dogma. However, while this is streaks ahead of Berlin and the like, McCallum too, for reasons of logic, has failed to come up with a satisfactory theory of freedom. ... Berlin outlines negative freedom as the extent to which “no man or body of men interferes” with an agent’s activity. ... A discussion of what coercion means then follows: that only other humans can coerce, and that mere incapacity is not a restriction on freedom. Benn and Weinstein agree with both those assertions, as outlined in Gray’s book, Freedom[3]. ... To elaborate, talking of gravity as being a restriction on our freedom is absurd; as to be bound by gravity is an essential part of how we operate as a species. ... To ignore the agent himself as a potential coercer of his own freedom is to ignore perhaps the biggest culprit. Benn and Weinstein come to Berlin’s defense by claiming that internal impediments to action are not restrictions on your freedom, but are rather reductions in the agent’s abilities. ... as a sophisticated form of paraplegia - a lack of ability rather than a lack of freedom is governing the situation. ... To confine freedom to the absence of external certainties is an incomplete picture. ... The agent himself can be a restriction on freedom and often is.
Our bodies and minds might be our only source of liberty, but it does not follow to say that they cannot also inhibit our freedom at the same time. ... In other words, Berlin has been blind to the true nature and complexity of humanity in the pursuit of a workable definition of freedom.
Aside from these weaknesses in his concept of negative freedom, there is his dogmatic support for it, over the ‘potential evils’ of positive freedom. The natural extension of the discussion of negative freedom is the analysis of to what extent is coercion desired for the functioning society. Berlin argues that a minimalist state is all that is desired and anything more interfering is both undesirable and counterproductive to freedom.
Approximate Word count = 2231
Approximate Pages = 8.9
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|