Security over Freedom?

18-12-2018, 05:48 PM

Lukecetion Wrote: Freedom is when someone tells you to stop and you can tell them; "No". If someone tells you to stop something, and you comply despite the fact that you don't want to stop, then you have effectively surrendered your own freedom in trade for the perks that offer. If you want to live within a system that has a set of rules to benefit from the perks that comes with that, you have given off your freedom for the time being. Though true freedom, as I stated is to have the option to say "no" even within such a system. No one is stopping you from going out into a unoccupied piece of land and building yourself a house and living off the land.

Though you can't get both sides. You can't have utter complete freedom and isolation from a system and still benefit from the perks of said system. You are never forced into a system, you are always given the option to follow that system every single day and that is true freedom as far as I can see. It is logical in the same sense people see it as logical to behave when they are visiting someone else's house. You play by their rules at that time, not your own. That would be a system in which you trade your normal behavior in for the perks and benefits of being in that "someone's" house for a limited time.

That is what people utterly fail to see when they talk about "freedom" in the sense of anarchy. They believe that a lack of system is freedom, yet forgetting that by nature, us humans abide by a system that we refer to as the "laws of nature" and the concept of continuity. Freedom is to have the option to chose, not the lack of options.

---

No, being an honest individual who says they'd gladly give up privacy for the perks and benefits that gets them. Instead of being someone who is a hypocrite and states that they would never do that, yet are currently exploiting the perks and benefits of doing exactly that.

There are various definitions for freedom. I use it in a sense of, freedom to do anything without restrictions.

Your definition of freedom takes it to another step of, even though there are restrictions and perks to surrendering freedom, do it anyways because they can't take away your mental freedom. Because if you give into the system, you're no longer free, mentally.

But like I said before. Realistically, with me wanting to walk outside naked with bananas taped to my body, I'd probably be detained, jailed, or shot. By my definition, there isn't freedom if there are restrictions. This isn't a mentaility issue. However, it could be, if you use the definition of freedom as a state of mind. Because if you go to jail, you'll still have physical freedom?