i agree with the Kantian definition of freedom, linked to morality. In a social context, and especially in our multicultural societies, public freedom is a consensus on general moral issues such as what should be punished by the law, what should be tolerated, in this sense we can agree on the fact that stealing some legitimately acquired property is bad, murder is wrong etc...; we also have private freedoms, which still follow our moral principles but are more personal, and they could offend others so we keep them to ourselves. However a requirement for private freedoms is that those which these freedoms involve must have a say in the way they are treated: for example, I am totally in favor of women being seen as different than men and subsequently have a different role in the relationship, but only in the private sphere and with their consent.
freedom is being able to live in a way which respects our deepest moral convictions and having a right to the means of living in such a way, I suppose is my philosophy of freedom.
thanks for hearing me out
|