Today I reached a wall.
I cannot get over it. I cannot get under it. I cannot get around it.
There is not much to see on either side of the wall, except a few people. Some are on this side (us), and some are on the other (them).
How do I find out if it is them or us that are free ?
[1017:3660]
5 comments:
Isn't it true we can only ascertain freedom relative to a comparison of the other groups relative freedoms and constraints, where communication between two groups is not possible it would be impossible to come to or draw any conclusion? If I hadn't seen such riches I could live with being poor - James
there is no mention of the possibility of (or indeed impossibility of) communication. but what would one ask?
i agree with your point, freedom is relative.
a friend blogged a similar point when writing about how the arts lighten the heavy journey of life in zimbabwe etc. if you're interested;
http://heathcotesafari.blogspot.com/2009/03/ready-for-long-one.html
Furthermore, isn't freedom dictated by constraint. If I am constrained as to my choices I am not truly free even though I have a choice?
A further point, if my choices are predetermined for me by a higher being, maybe I have no freedom at all, it only seemed so at the time?
Basically I think we are all prisoners, some just understand it better than others.
yes free-dom i.e. the 'dom'ain within which we are 'free' can only be defined relative to boundaries.
Interestingly, on the issue of relational freedoms, Henry Rosemont writes "I am not a free, autonomous individual. I am a son, husband, father, grandfather, neighbour, colleague, student, teacher, citizen, friend. I have a large number of relational obligations and responsibilities, which severely constrain what I do. These responsibilities occasionally frustrate or annoy, they more often are satisfying and they are always binding ... And my individuality, if anyone wishes to keep the concept, will come from the specific actions I take in meeting my relational responsibilities." ('Confucianism and Human Rights' NY: Cambridge University Press 1998)
Post a Comment