Is anyone really free?

[John Titor]

I am not a number! I am a free man!

 

[Julias_Seizure]

Depends on how you define free. If your doing something just for survival then it doesnt count because thats something you have no choice in. Most people spend 30% of their lives sleeping which noone can really choose not to do. Another 30% working which also isnt much of a choice. So that leaves 40% of peoples time thats actually spent freely not accounting for all the other small things that everyone does but has no choice in

 

[nonvir_1984]

Usually take long walks in the morning. Gives me time to think.

Today, the question, "Is anyone really free?" came to mind.

I believe every one of us exists in a cage, literal, figurative, or both. The cage can be of one's own making, or imposed due to circumstances beyond one's control, or both. Cages are of different sizes. Sometimes we never notice the presence of that cage until it makes itself known. Cages are anything from decrepit to luxurious.

In my opinion, the only place a person can be truly free is in their own minds. Cages confine the body, but not the mind. One is free to think as they please. One is not free to do as they please. One way or another, there are constraints limiting actions and/or there are consequences of actions. But there are no constraints hampering thoughts, and no consequences of merely thinking any particular thought. So think, and be free.

Just some musings by Uncle Joe Stalin.

This is the question we were posed in Philosophy 101, first day. The first move is to ask: What do you mean by "free". We spent the next 10 weeks on that.
Best course I ever did; fucked me for life.
And my answer today: kind of, sometimes, but not really most of the time, because we are driven by passions, appetites, wants, desires and so on, that prevents us being really impartial and in control and keeping in perspective all that stuff that influences our decisions and skews our perceptions.
It's a great question.
And I leave you with this:
Stone walls do not a prison make,
Nor iron bars a cage:
Minds innocent and quiet take
That for an hermitage.
If I have freedom in my love,
And in my soul am free,
Angels alone, that soar above,
Enjoy such liberty.
from To Althea, from Prison, by Richard Lovelace.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

Being made of flesh and bone completely negates free will as those are physical objects set on a evolutionary path which we have no control over. There is nothing about you that has even a semblance of independence from flesh and blood, unless you commit suicide that is.
Your instincts tell you to gather information, the easiest way to do so is to watch tv, as you do not have to concentrate and the info is being fed to you in the easiest way possible. Basically television is a great way to waste time, the biggest enemy of human beings.

1. I can still make choices.
2. I meant fiction. Let me use a different example: if I am really just an evolutionary slave, why do I intentionally make sub-optimal decisions, like, for example, shitposting on Kiwi Farms instead of getting ready for work?

 

[LinuxVoid]

1. I can still make choices.
2. I meant fiction. Let me use a different example: if I am really just an evolutionary slave, why do I intentionally make sub-optimal decisions, like, for example, shitposting on Kiwi Farms instead of getting ready for work?

Dude, I am not you, why would I know why you are wasting time shitposting on Kiwi farms, maybe you want attention and your work won't give you any? Maybe your work is bs and deep down you know it which is way you are reluctant to go there? There a million reasons why you could be making the decisions that you do.
Look man, you could be a psychopath killing children at your local kindergarten, my point is that it doesn't matter what you do or who you are, you only exist in your head and whatever you do, is really done by whatever compulsion is moving your action at this moment.

 

[SugarSnot]

1. I can still make choices.
2. I meant fiction. Let me use a different example: if I am really just an evolutionary slave, why do I intentionally make sub-optimal decisions, like, for example, shitposting on Kiwi Farms instead of getting ready for work?

Evolution doesn't give a damn about optimization, all it cares about is if the creature is able to survive long enough in the current environment to have children. The internet is a very new environmental factor in the history of our genes and will without a doubt have an effect on the direction of our species.

 

[Lemmingwise]

I don't even think our own minds are truly free. Even in thought process you probably consider actions or plans you'd like to carry out but you are constrained either by lack of will, or realizing the consequences of those actions you consider doing or carrying out or even the limitations of your mind. Some of us are also burdened by our past, trauma, or you may purposely block your mind for many reasons.

You can create a fortitude of your will, that you try to impose or build up or contain, but I don't think that can ever be a "freedom" of itself. Even when we make "free" choices our mind still balances the risk vs. reward of those actions and then either denies us those choices depending on the consequences or limits them.

Honestly, not the same exact thing but I used to debate a psychologist who believed the most natural people or in a sense "free people" were those who were insane. Although it sounds like a joke because many of them are out of control, but he used to argue because they had no restraint and often wouldn't' gauge the risk vs. reward maybe they were indeed the most free people (or as far as one can be within certain limitations) on Earth. They often do what they want without consideration of the consequences, no care for learning from repeat behavior in many cases.

In a sense I wonder if that is the true form of absolute freedom: Chaos? (Or maybe just insanity itself.)

I don't understand why people focus on being "truly free". While certainly it can be hard to conceptualise these kind of absolutes, it can be easy to look at the comparative freedom between say, being born in north korea (as anyone except glorious leader) or basicly any other country.

In also think freedom is less about a kind of omnipotence or perfect discipline of mind, and rather about negation of the opposite, of being unchained.

Because you might well choose to never leave your house similar to being placed under house arrest. You don't feel a chain until it's preventing you from walking forward.

But when you do, it's hard to notice anything else. Like a European man in Japan, there comes a point where the doors remain closed (or a black man in US, etcetera). Suddenly, it's hard not to notice the chain and rebel against it. To fight for freedom, through either word or deed.

I think we have a very strong drive to be free, which is why movies like the matrix and books like nineteen eighty-four resomate so strongly with people. Because the way to limit people's freedom is more subtle these days. Journalists aren't forced what to write like in the soviet union, but you won't keep your job as journalist if you're not the type of journalist to weite the right kinda thing politically.

There is no ban on art, but only art with specific messages get massive amounts of funding and patronage (either ugly, demoralizing art or pro multiculturalism art, or both. I can understand someone being skeptical about this claim, but it's my field with decades of experience and I can prove it, though would prefer a seperate thread for it). There is somewhat of a ban on books now, with the removal of books and wikipedia is getting more like this by the day as well.

Censorship is the removal of the freedom to exchange ideas and information. Again it's when you notice the limits of said freedom that the chains become noticable, and if you're anything like me, which I think in this respect most people are, then you get a fire in your heart to want to defend that kind of freedom.

There are unlimited ways in which you may be chained, and at any given point you are unlikely to be free of all of them, but that doesn't mean you can't find greater or lesser freedom from the choices you make.

I guess what I'm trying to say is you can't always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes, you get what you need.

 

[DDBCAE CBAADCBE]

The answer is no. True freedom isn't possible in a functioning society.

 

[Mewtwo_Rain]

I don't understand why people focus on being "truly free". While certainly it can be hard to conceptualise these kind of absolutes, it can be easy to look at the comparative freedom between say, being born in north korea (as anyone except glorious leader) or basicly any other country.

In also think freedom is less about a kind of omnipotence or perfect discipline of mind, and rather about negation of the opposite, of being unchained.

Because you might well choose to never leave your house similar to being placed under house arrest. You don't feel a chain until it's preventing you from walking forward.

But when you do, it's hard to notice anything else. Like a European man in Japan, there comes a point where the doors remain closed (or a black man in US, etcetera). Suddenly, it's hard not to notice the chain and rebel against it. To fight for freedom, through either word or deed.

I think we have a very strong drive to be free, which is why movies like the matrix and books like nineteen eighty-four resomate so strongly with people. Because the way to limit people's freedom is more subtle these days. Journalists aren't forced what to write like in the soviet union, but you won't keep your job as journalist if you're not the type of journalist to weite the right kinda thing politically.

There is no ban on art, but only art with specific messages get massive amounts of funding and patronage (either ugly, demoralizing art or pro multiculturalism art, or both. I can understand someone being skeptical about this claim, but it's my field with decades of experience and I can prove it, though would prefer a seperate thread for it). There is somewhat of a ban on books now, with the removal of books and wikipedia is getting more like this by the day as well.

Censorship is the removal of the freedom to exchange ideas and information. Again it's when you notice the limits of said freedom that the chains become noticable, and if you're anything like me, which I think in this respect most people are, then you get a fire in your heart to want to defend that kind of freedom.

There are unlimited ways in which you may be chained, and at any given point you are unlikely to be free of all of them, but that doesn't mean you can't find greater or lesser freedom from the choices you make.

I guess what I'm trying to say is you can't always get what you want, but if you try, sometimes, you get what you need.

I fully agree with your concept, and I don't want my post to come off as suggesting I'm not satisfied with my level of freedom. In a sense I poised the question if chaos or insanity is absolute freedom because it is a negative connotation, and thus maybe shouldn't be needed or striven for, since analogy wise I'm more posing the question what would it mean for a man to get everything he ever wanted[Power/desires/etc.] (in this case "absolute freedom" if he had to sacrifice his soul (or in this case sanity/comfort of balance) for that very concept.

 

[boulderblundermatt90]

going to toss my two cents. it depends on what "freedom" is.

is it the freedom to make and act on any decision you desire? then yeah, sure. of course certain ones will get you killed (like trying to tank a blow from a speeding car, or trying to raid your local cops) but you can absolutely take them and not have your brain instantly shut down. only your personal hangups stop that, which are grown from experience and environment, usually.

but if you mean freedom like those sovcits sperg about, then no, no it does not. you will never be able to shoot joe schmo and duel for your honor in court like an autist. we've moved on from that world, go sperg in africa if you're that hung up on it.

 

[vanilla_pepsi_head]

The answer is no. True freedom isn't possible in a functioning society.

That's about it. Modern free society is mostly about optimizing the level of personal freedom one has (without infringing on anyone else's autonomy, of course) while setting ground rules about how much one must contribute to maintaining a healthy society. There is always controversy about these limits of course (vaccinations, arms, hate speech, taxes) but overall if it were that bad of a deal you'd have a lot more people going full hermit and living off the grid in the middle of Buttfuck, Nowhere.

It's arguable if being more self sufficient is equal to being "more free" but I don't believe it is, personally. Living off the grid requires massive time dedication to basic survival and I'd feel less "free" doing that than living in the city with relatively massive amounts of leisure time at the expense of following a few laws, paying taxes and outsourcing my problem solving to the police. That's just me though. If a hardcore survivalist feels more free doing his own thing then I wouldn't argue with him.

 

[JosephStalin]

While walking this morning was mulling over the concept of "absolute freedom". After some thought, I defined "absolute freedom" as the ability to physically do anything you want to do, without limits, constraints, or consequences. If you can think of doing it, you go out and do it. That just isn't possible, for anyone. In that respect, all of us have a limited physical freedom, to greater and lesser extents.

Thinking some more, while you have the freedom to think of anything, without limits, constraints, or consequences, that freedom is limited due to the limits on the physical ability to bring those thoughts to fruition.

So if being truly, absolutely free means being able to conceive of anything and being physically able to make any concept reality, then nobody is truly and absolutely free. We all have limited freedom, again, to greater and lesser extents, at least as human beings in this plane of existence.

 

[ICametoLurk]

Liberalism is "freedom from" and not "freedom to".

In other words, Liberalism can only sustain itself as long as there is an ideological enemy from which the people are free. You know, Monarchism, Fascism, religions, and Communism were viewed as enemies because they viewed a Monarch, the nation-state, gods, class, as more impotent than the individual.

Once the enemy is gone, people start to realize they aren't actually free and Liberalism has to look for other enemies.

This is happening today, with the rise of the anti-racist, anti-homophobic, anti-misogynist, anti-nationalist liberals, left wing liberals paint right wing liberals as fascists and right wing liberals paint left wing liberals as communists. There is no enemy because Liberalism won so it starts eating itself.

This is all done only to keep the nihilistic individualist ideology of liberalism alive, because without the enemy, liberalism cannot operate.

It's good because this moves history forward.

 

[UptownRuckus]

Freedom comes from Obedience

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

your posts ranting against niggers and faggots don't show much love, though

They're not real people, though, they don't count.

 

[KimCoppolaAficionado]

They're not real people, though, they don't count.

Please create a non-tautological definition for "real person" that excludes these categories.

 

[PT 522]

Free will does not exist--not logically, not scientifically, not philosophically.
Lab testing could guess which button participants would chose randomly at will a full second in advance before they were even aware that they were about to make a choice.
The more we find out about the world the more that the idea we are all individual actors slowly starts to die. Environmental factors control everyone, just in a complex and seemingly unpredictable way.

 

[HolocaustDenier]

"The beginning of freedom is the realization that you are not “the thinker.” The moment you start watching the thinker, a higher level of consciousness becomes activated. You then begin to realize that there is a vast realm of intelligence beyond thought, that thought is only a tiny aspect of that intelligence. You also realize that all the things that truly matter – beauty, love, creativity, joy, inner peace – arise from beyond the mind. You begin to awaken."

 

[Autocrat]

Free to various extents, depending on how much we take control of our lives.

The Argument For Freedom in a Predetermined Universe
I do believe in pre-detemination (i.e. causality on a universal scale), but just because it's pre-determined doesn't mean it's out of our control. I like Indian food and I'm not a big fan of German. A hypothetical friend likes both. If this friend gives me the choice between Indian and German, I will pick Indian unless other causal factors make me choose German. Just because it's pre-ordained what I'd pick based off of my preferences, doesn't make the preference or choice any less mine.
(Just googled this and it's called Compatibilism)

Free will does not exist--not logically, not scientifically, not philosophically.

See above

 

[Exigent Circumcisions]

I'll just begin by stating that anybody who argues for absolute determinism is undermining their own credibility: if you don't believe that we're capable of freedom of thought at the very least, why are you making an argument at all? Nobody's going to change their minds based on your arguments, and that's the basis of your argument.

Anyway; free? I'd say we're free in all the ways that are actually important, and constrained in ways that make life worth living. Without constraint there'd be nothing to strive for or against, so there goes achievement, satisfaction, redemption, etc. Nothing that comes for free is worth a damned thing, most well-adjust people understand that just fine. It's definitely true that sometimes the only place a man can be free is his mind, but our minds (and souls) are the entire basis of human ascendancy over Nature to begin with, so that makes sense to me. To have a mind is the basis of freedom, I guess is what I'm trying to articulate here.

What you decide to do with that freedom and the consequences that result from that are up to the individual but again, these constraints aren't bugs in my worldview; they're the features.

ETA; @JosephStalin I wasn't going to go into this but I see you asked the question "What good would Absolute Freedom do us?" or something similar. I honestly think not much. Again, without constraint life would become dull relatively quickly. I could probably keep myself entertained for a few thousands years without the constraint of death, but after I've done everything a few thousand times I imagine death would be a blessing; imagine life after all the stars go out. Pretty bleak.

Likewise with anything else. Life is only precious because of it's sheer improbability in the face of the basic laws of Nature; everything is gradually falling apart and going dark around us and yet here we are, living, thinking beings sitting on an autistic web-forum wondering what it's all about.