Feeling of freedom. Remember, you are the most important person in your life.

How do we protect our sense of freedom

If persuasive messages are intrusive, then they can be perceived as an invasion of the freedom of individual choice and thereby intensify the search for ways to protect against them. Thus, if a pushy salesman convinces me to buy his product, my first reaction is to maintain my own independence: I would rather leave the store as soon as possible...
This resistance can manifest itself in a variety of interesting forms. Let's say I'm walking down the street and I'm politely asked to sign some kind of petition. I don't really understand the essence of what they offer me to sign. But at the moment when they explain to me what's what, a certain person stops nearby and begins to openly "pressure" me, demanding that I do not sign anything. In order to resist the pressure and retain my freedom of choice, I am more likely to sign the proposed petition...
Of course, people can (and do) succumb to the influence and submit to social pressure ... However, when this pressure becomes so pronounced that it threatens our sense of freedom, we not only resist the pressure, but also strive to act in the opposite direction.
There is another aspect of the need for freedom and autonomy... Other things being equal, when faced with information that contradicts their beliefs, people seek, if possible, to find counterarguments. In this way they can keep their own opinions from being over-influenced by others and protect their own sense of autonomy.
Questions and tasks: 1) How, according to the psychologist, do people protect their inner freedom and autonomy? 2) Have you ever been in a situation similar topics that are described in the snippet? How did you act in such cases?

Conclusions to Chapter II

1. Science and philosophy have come a long way in comprehending society and the social essence of man. Overcoming the one-sidedness of previous approaches, modern researchers define the essence of man as a unity of the natural, social and spiritual, consider him as a subject of socio-historical activity, a creator of culture.
2. Philosophers and sociologists distinguish three levels of consideration of society: socio-philosophical, historical-typological, concrete-historical. At the socio-philosophical level, the search for a social macrotheory capable of covering the entire variety of types and forms of social relations has long been conducted. Stage and cyclic, formational and civilizational, local and global models of society have been developed.
3. At the historical and typological level, studies distinguish traditional (agrarian), industrial (capitalist), post-industrial (civilizational) societies. There are also civilizations of western and eastern types.
4. In modern social science, the concept of social progress is more deeply comprehended than before. The inconsistency of progress is noted, often the high "price" of society for achievements in certain areas. Discussions continue on the criteria for progress. At the same time, many researchers believe that true progress is manifested in the rise of humanism, in the creation of conditions for the free development of the individual.

Questions and assignments for chapter II

1. "The evolution of the primitive herd into a consanguineous community led to profound changes in the person himself, to the development of his communicative qualities, the emergence of the rudiments of morality."
"The gradual development of a person's communication skills with his own kind contributed to the transition to a higher level of social organization - a consanguineous community."
Formulate the problem, the various solutions of which are reflected in the given statements. Which of the two points of view do you find more convincing? If you do not agree with any of them, formulate your own solution to this problem.
2. Analyze two options for typology of societies. Define Selection Criteria various types societies. Fill the table.

3. The German philosopher Fichte stated: “The philosopher who deals with history as a philosopher is guided by the a priori thread of the world plan, which is clear to him without any history, and he uses history ... only to explain and show in living life what is clear and without history.
How do you understand the words “a priori thread of the world plan”? Name the philosophical teachings known to you that contain a similar plan of world history. What, in your opinion, are the advantages and disadvantages of the philosopher's view of history?
4. Expand the connection between social progress and the increase in human freedom. How does the increase in human freedom in modern society express itself?

Getting ready for the exam

1. Which of the following characterizes society as a system:
1) thousand years of history existence;
2) the relationship of spheres of public life;
3) variability of forms;
4) unpredictability of future states?
2. Which of the following features is characteristic of humans and absent in animals:
1) the action of the mechanisms of heredity;
2) the work of the sense organs;
3) species specialization;
4) articulate speech?
3. Eliminate the excess from the list.
Only humans tend to:
1) upright posture;
2) moral feelings;
3) articulate speech;
4) use of tools.
4. Go to industrial society characterized by:
1) industrial revolution;
2) the predominance of agriculture over the service sector;
3) the emergence of new information technologies;
4) a decrease in social mobility.
5. Are the following judgments about the interaction of society and nature correct?
A. Society as a creator of culture develops independently of nature.
B. History knows no examples of the beneficial influence of society on nature.
1) Only A is true;
2) only B is true;
3) both judgments are true;
4) both judgments are wrong.
6. Based on knowledge from social science and history courses, compare reform and revolution according to the following criteria: 1) the depth and scale of the impact on public life; 2) the role of the masses; 3) predictability of consequences.
7. Write an essay based on the following statement: “History itself can neither force a person nor involve him in a dirty business” (J.-P. Sartre).

Chapter III
ACTIVITY AS PEOPLE'S WAY OF EXISTENCE

§ 17. Human activity and its diversity

Compare the two definitions. The first is from a philosophical dictionary: “Activity is a form of existence of human society; manifestation of the activity of the subject, expressed in the expedient change of the surrounding world, as well as in the transformation of the person himself. The second is from a dictionary of psychology: “Activity is a form of mental activity of the subject, which consists in the motivational achievement of the consciously set goal of cognition or transformation of the object.”
It is easy to see that both definitions speak of the activity of the subject in an expedient (consistent with the goal) change (transformation) of the surrounding world. However, the philosophical definition interprets activity in the same way as a form of society's existence, while psychology focuses on mental activity, that is, manifested in a person's subjective experiences, in his feelings, thinking, and will. As you can see, looking at an activity from different points of view allows you to understand it more fully.

ESSENCE AND STRUCTURE OF ACTIVITIES

Let us turn to the first definition of activity given above. Being one of the aspects of human existence, activity reproduces social ties. It realizes the forces and abilities of a person, which are embodied in the products of activity. This chain of connections shows social essence of activity.
In the structure of activity, its subject and object are distinguished. Subject of activity - the one who carries out the activity an object - that's what it's aimed at. For example, a farmer (subject of activity) works on the land and grows various crops on it (object of activity). For the Ministry of Education as a subject of activity, all educational institutions of the country are an object in relation to which management activities are carried out.
So, the subject of activity can be a person, a group of people, an organization, a state body. The object can be natural materials, various objects, spheres or areas of people's lives. The activity of the subject can also be directed to another person. For example, a coach influences an athlete (trains him). The object of the artist's activity is the audience in the hall (audience). Finally, the activity of the subject can be directed at himself (a person consciously trains his body, tempers it, educates the will, engages in self-education, etc.).

Further, in the structure of activity, one can single out the goal of the action, the means to achieve the goal. It has already been noted above: a person begins any activity with the fact that he sets a goal for himself.
Target - it is a conscious image of the anticipated result, the achievement of which is aimed at. For example, in the head of an architect, before the construction of a house begins, his image appears. Indeed, is it possible to start building a building without imagining what it will be ( apartment house or administrative building, village hut or temple, barracks or palace)? Its image can be shown in a drawing, a drawing, a three-dimensional model, but first it appears in the mind of an architect.
So, the goal is what is represented in the mind and expected as a result of a certain way directed activity.
Is it possible to consider any goal that you want to be feasible? With flint, one can set out to make an arrowhead, but one cannot make a bow out of it. On space flights at the turn of the XIX-XX centuries. one could only dream, but they became the practical goal of the activities of many people only a few decades later, when the scientific and technical conditions necessary for this appeared. Consequently, the achievable goal of an activity may not be any image of the desired, but only one that corresponds to the real possibilities of the surrounding world and the subject of the activity itself. At the same time, a person may or may not know his capabilities, the properties of objects in the surrounding world. The goal is determined more precisely and becomes the more definite, the better the subject of activity knows what are the real means and conditions for achieving it. "Who is smart?" - asked the Syrian thinker of the XIII century. Abu'l-Faraj. And he answered: "The one who strives only for an achievable goal."
The structure of activity can be divided into various actions. So, educational activity includes recording lectures, reading books, solving problems, etc. The activities of cosmonauts also consist of a variety of activities: observing the Earth, adjusting instruments, conducting experiments, repair work, and training. The activity of the farmer involves the performance of such actions as plowing, sowing, weeding, harvesting. In a separate action, one can also see the goal, the means, the result. For example, the purpose of weeding is to create conditions for growth cultivated plants.
When the goal is defined, its achievement or failure of the activity depends on funds. To build a house, building materials, mechanisms, tools and other means of production are needed. To grow a crop, you need seeds, tools, a system of agricultural techniques, etc. To teach students to read and write, you need textbooks, notebooks, effective techniques academic work etc. The means must match the end. When they say: "Fire sparrows from a cannon," it means that the means do not correspond to the goal.
Is it possible, having set a noble goal, to use dishonest means? Here is how the Renaissance thinker Niccolò Machiavelli answered this question:
“The actions of all people, and especially sovereigns, from whom you cannot ask in court, are concluded by results, so let the sovereigns try to maintain power and win. Whatever means are used for this, they will always be considered worthy and approved, for the mob is tempted by visibility and success. He believed that in order to achieve the goal, one can deceive, "if necessary, do not shy away from evil."
So, the winners are not judged? End justifies the means? There is another point of view: not any measures are suitable for achieving a noble goal, but only noble ones. A good end cannot be achieved by unworthy, unkind means. Unkind means lead to the fact that the result differs significantly from the goal: it also becomes unkind. The centuries-old experience of mankind convinces us of the validity of these conclusions. (Give historical examples to support this idea.)

NEEDS AND INTERESTS

Psychologists study the experiences of a person that prompt him to act. Such experiences of a person are called motive. The word "motive" is of French origin and literally means "an incentive, a reason for any action." In psychology, a motive is understood as that which induces a person's activity, for the sake of which it is performed. Needs, social attitudes, beliefs, interests, inclinations and emotions, ideals of people can act as motives.
Human needs are manifested in the motives of activity. A need is a need experienced and realized by a person for what is necessary to maintain his body and develop his personality.
The need is usually directed to some object. For example, hunger is the need for food, the object of need is food. The inability to cope with any task gives rise to the need for knowledge that is necessary to solve it. Knowledge is the subject of need in this case.
Human needs can be divided into three groups:
1. biological needs(experiencing the need for breathing, nutrition, water, normal heat exchange, movement, self-preservation, the preservation of the family and other needs associated with the biological organization of man, his belonging to nature).
2.Social needs, generated by society. They embody the need of the individual, for example, in diverse relationships with other people, in self-realization, self-affirmation, public recognition of its merits.
3. Ideal Needs: to know the world in general and in its particulars, to be aware of one's place in it, the meaning and purpose of one's existence. The need for knowledge was noted in antiquity. The philosopher Aristotle wrote: "All people by nature strive for knowledge." Many people devote their leisure time to reading, visiting museums, concert halls and theaters. For some people, the ideal needs come down to entertainment. But even in this case, they are diverse: someone is fond of cinema, someone is dancing, and someone is football.
Biological, social and ideal needs are interconnected. Basically biological needs in humans, unlike animals, become social. Indeed, on hot days, many people are thirsty, but no one (unless he is in extreme situation) will not drink from a puddle on the road. A person chooses a drink that quenches his thirst and takes care that the vessel from which he drinks is clean. And eating for a person becomes a need, the satisfaction of which has many social facets: the culinary subtleties, the decor, the table setting, the quality of the dishes, the design of the dish, and the pleasant company that shares his meal are important.
For most people, social needs dominate the ideal. The need for knowledge often acts as a means to acquire a profession, to occupy a worthy position in society.
In some cases it is generally difficult to separate the biological, the social, the ideal. An example is the need for communication.
This classification of needs is not the only one in the scientific literature. There are many others. One of them was developed by the American psychologist A. Maslow. He identified the following basic needs:
physiological: in the reproduction of the genus, food, breathing, clothing, housing, physical movements, rest, etc .;
existential(from a Latin word meaning literally “existence”): in the security of one’s existence, comfort, constancy of living conditions, employment security, accident insurance, confidence in the future, etc .;
social: in social ties, communication, affection, caring for others and attention to oneself, participating in joint activities with others;
prestigious: in self-respect, respect from others, recognition, achievement of success and appreciation, career growth;
spiritual: in self-actualization, self-expression.
According to Maslow's theory, the first two types of needs are primary (innate), and the next three are secondary (acquired). The needs of each subsequent level become urgent when the previous ones are satisfied.
Along with needs, the most important motive for activity is social settings. By them is meant the general orientation of a person to a certain social facility expressing a predisposition to act in a certain way with respect to a given object. Such an object can be, for example, a family.
Depending on the evaluation of the value family life, its usefulness for himself, the individual may be predisposed to creating a family, maintaining it, or, on the contrary, not disposed to create and protect family ties. His actions, his behavior depend on it.
An important role in the motives of activity is played by beliefs - stable views on the world, ideals and principles, as well as the desire to bring them to life through their actions and deeds.
In the formation of motives for activity, a special role is played by interests. This word is also of Latin origin, meaning literally "to matter, important." The interests of people are based on their needs, but are directed not so much to the objects of needs, but to those social conditions that make these objects more or less accessible, primarily material and spiritual goods that ensure the satisfaction of needs. The interests of people consist in the preservation or transformation of those conditions (institutions, orders, norms of relationships, etc.) on which the distribution of benefits depends. These interests depend on the position in society of certain groups of the population. Each person belongs to several social groups. For example, a young person belongs to a group of young people who have their own interests that are different from other groups (to get an education, a profession, to have material conditions for starting a family, etc.). He also belongs to some ethnic group and has common interests with other members of this group (the possibility of developing a national culture, language). Being a member of other groups, a person has corresponding social interests. This means that interests are determined by the position of various social groups and individuals in society. They are more or less recognized by people and are the most important incentives for various types activities. A variety of interests interact in society: individual, group, interests of society as a whole. By orientation, interests are divided into economic, social, political, spiritual. They find a generalized expression of the actual needs of people.
Their ideals are connected with the interests of people. social ideal - this is an image of a perfect society, which reflects the interests and aspirations of a certain social group, its idea of higher justice and the best social order. A moral ideal - this is an idea of an exemplary person worthy of imitation, the features of his personality, behavior and relationships with people. The moral ideal, as a rule, is closely connected with the social ideal.
Needs, interests, ideals are recognized by people, that is, they characterize conscious activity. People think about activities, exercise self-control of their actions. However, the unconscious also manifests itself in activity, which means mental life that takes place without the participation of consciousness. Examples are stereotypes of automated actions in the process of solving problems or intuition, which will be discussed below.
In human activity, it is of great importance will, that is, the ability to act in the direction of a consciously set goal, while overcoming one's own desires and aspirations that are opposite in their direction.

ACTIVITIES

Exists various classifications activities. First of all, we note the division of activity into practical and spiritual.
Practical activities is aimed at transforming real objects of nature and society. It includes material production activity (transformation of nature) and social transformation activity (transformation of society).
spiritual activity associated with a change in people's consciousness. It includes: cognitive activity (reflection of reality in artistic and scientific form, in myths and religious teachings); value-oriented activity (positive or negative attitude of people to the phenomena of the surrounding world, the formation of their worldview); prognostic activity (planning or foreseeing possible changes in reality).
All these activities are interconnected. For example, the implementation of reforms (social transformational activities) should be preceded by an analysis of their possible consequences (forecasting activities). And the ideas of the French enlighteners Voltaire, C. Montesquieu, J.-J. Rousseau, D. Diderot (value-oriented activity) played a big role in the preparation of the French Revolution of the 18th century. (social-transformative activity). Material and production activity contributed to the knowledge of nature, the development of the sciences, i.e., cognitive activity, and the results of cognitive activity (scientific discoveries) contribute to the improvement of production activity.

In the variety of human activities, one can distinguish creative and destructive. The results of the first are cities and villages, flowering gardens and cultivated fields, handicrafts and machines, books and films, cured sick and educated children. Destructive activity is, first of all, wars. Dead and maimed people, destroyed dwellings and temples, devastated fields, burnt manuscripts and books - these are the consequences of local and world, civil and colonial wars.
But the administrative activity of people in power can also be destructive. The Russian writer M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin satirically depicted a boss who decided to do as much harm as possible in the area entrusted to him, so that “later the benefit would come out of him.” His program: "First, he will abolish science, then he will burn the city, and finally, he will frighten the population." And every time, at the same time, she will shed tears and say: “God sees that I am doing this harm for their own benefit.” And in our time there are figures who, in the name of a utopian goal, or for profit, or in order to leave a mark on history, are ready to destroy forms of social life that have justified themselves, break good traditions, and cause irreparable damage to nature by their actions. Regarding destructive activity, people say: "To break is not to build." But often destructive activity is generated not by evil will, but by limited opportunities to achieve the desired positive result. “The great reformer,” says V. G. Belinsky, “comes not to destroy, but to create, destroying.”

CREATIVE ACTIVITY

Let's imagine that the designers were given the task of creating a new model of a car. How to make your car safer? How to reduce fuel consumption? How to increase the durability of components and parts? How to prevent pollution of the atmosphere by exhaust gases? How to reduce the consumption of metals and other materials in the manufacture of a machine? These questions need new answers, the search for which is a creative activity.
What is creation? This word is used to designate an activity that generates something qualitatively new, which has never existed before. It could be new goal, a new result or new means, new ways to achieve them. Creativity is most clearly manifested in the activities of scientists, inventors, writers, and artists. Sometimes they say that these are people of creative professions. In fact, not all people professionally engaged in science make discoveries. At the same time, many other activities (teacher or entrepreneur, gardener or cook) include elements of creativity. In the broad sense of the word, creativity is generally all the activity of people that transforms the natural world and social reality in accordance with their goals and needs.
Creativity lies not in that activity, where each action is completely regulated by rules, but in that, the preliminary regulation of which contains a certain degree of uncertainty. Creativity is an activity that creates new information and involves self-organization. The need for new rules non-standard tricks arises when we encounter new situations that are different from similar situations in the past.
important place in creative activity takes a combination, variation of existing knowledge, known ways actions. The need that motivates activity can be a source imagination, fantasies, i.e., reflections in the human mind of the phenomena of reality in new, unusual, unexpected combinations and connections. Imagination allows you to get ahead of practice, to anticipate possible changes. It is known that the "dead loop", the first aerobatics, was performed by the pilot P. Nesterov, first in the imagination, and then on an airplane in the air. Fantasy is a necessary component of a person's creative activity, which is expressed in the construction of an image or a visual model of its results in cases where information about the conditions and means of achieving the goal is not enough.
The most important mechanism of creativity is intuition - knowledge, the origin of which is not realized. In this case, a person can say: "I can not prove my case, but I feel that it is necessary to act in such and such a way." In intuition, therefore, the unconscious is manifested in human activity. The solution to a complex scientific problem, which a researcher sometimes struggles with for years, often comes as if suddenly, at an unexpected time, even when the human brain is busy solving completely different problems.
But the unconscious in creativity, as a rule, is associated with conscious efforts aimed at solving emerging problems. Before a happy thought “lights up” a scientist or commander, inventor or poet, a lot of work is spent on finding a solution, analyzing its various options, and accumulating suitable material. Psychologists believe that on the way to the right solution, there is a conscious study of the problem and an unconscious accumulation of images, a clear awareness of the task and an unconscious finding of its solution. The discovery does not arise from scratch, it is based on past experience and accumulated knowledge. But the key to the solution may be the unconscious part of the previous experience, its "by-product".
There are other views on the nature of creativity. Thus, the Russian philosopher N. A. Berdyaev considered creativity to be an addition, the creation of something new that did not exist in the world. He connected the secret of creativity with God, who created the world out of nothing.
Modern science recognizes that any person in one way or another has the ability to creative activity. However, abilities can develop or die out. What should a young person do to develop Creative skills? Of course, to master the culture: language, knowledge, methods of activity. The experience of previous generations, imprinted in culture, includes the experience of creative activity. But it can be assimilated only through one's own involvement in such activities. We must learn to ask questions; solve non-standard, difficult tasks; consider different solutions; compare dissenting points of view; communicate with art; develop imagination, fantasy; not to believe any statement, but, doubting, to check its truth; apply various means to solve the problem; look for their best combination and remember the words of the great Russian composer P. I. Tchaikovsky: "Inspiration is such a guest who does not like to visit the lazy."
Basic concepts: activity, motives of activity, needs, interests, creativity.
Terms: goal, means to achieve the goal, actions, the unconscious.

1. For an architect, the goal appears in the form of a conceived structure. What could be the purpose of statesman, teacher, commander? Justify your answer.
2. The American writer E. Hemingway (1899-1961) said: "Every person is born for some business." Do you think the word "deed" here means an action or an activity? Explain your point of view.
3. Think about the meaning of the well-known parable.
A passer-by, seeing three workers rolling wheelbarrows with bricks, asked what they were doing. “Don’t you see,” said the first, “I drive a brick.” “I earn money for my family’s bread,” answered the second. And the third said: "I'm building a cathedral." Did they have the same activity? Or the same actions in three different activities?
4. How do you understand the expression "bury talent in the ground"?
5. Think about whether you are able to fulfill the conditions of creative activity that Academician V. I. Vernadsky singled out:
conduct a detailed analysis;
to see the general behind the particular;
not to be limited to the description of the phenomenon, but to deeply explore its essence and connection with other phenomena;
Don't avoid asking "why?"
trace the history of ideas;
collect as much information as possible about the subject of research from literary sources;
study general patterns scientific knowledge (think about how a person learns the world around him);
connect science with other areas of knowledge, with social life;
not only to solve problems, but also to find new, unresolved ones.
Try, observing these conditions, to prepare and discuss the problem “How can we improve preparation for creative activity at school?”.

Work with the source

Soviet philosopher A. L. Nikiforov on the relationship between activity and behavior.

Human activity performs two important functions: firstly, by influencing the surrounding world and transforming it, it serves as a means of satisfying the material and spiritual needs of the individual; secondly, it is a means of expressing and developing knowledge, skills, abilities of the individual. Both of these functions are merged into one in every act of human activity. We build houses, grow bread, make clothes, and launch rockets into space. By changing and adapting the outside world to meet our needs, in the process of changing the world around us, we simultaneously express our tastes, inclinations, our perception of the world and our attitude towards it. Therefore, on all products of our activity lies the imprint of the personality of a person of a certain historical era, a representative of a certain culture. The first of these functions of activity is performed by activity, the second - by behavior. Activity and behavior are not separate acts, but two sides of a single human activity.
A good example of the unity of behavior and activity in the activity of an individual is provided by the use of language. Linguists are known to distinguish language, which is a system of interrelated concepts (symbols), functioning and developing according to certain laws, and speech - the use of language by individuals in specific situations. In order to be understandable, speech must be built according to the generally valid laws of the language, but along with this, it always has an individual character and expresses the characteristics of the speaking subject. Therefore, although we all speak the same language, we speak differently. The use of language and its rules is an activity on which the behavior of the speaker is superimposed, so speech arises.
Questions and tasks: 1) What, according to the scientist, is the difference between activity and behavior? Why should they be considered as two sides of a single human activity? 2) Which of these two concepts does each of the following words refer to: goal, deed, deed, means, operations, results, crime? 3) Illustrate the relationship between activity and behavior using the example of three food vendors (or another example of your own).

Try to conduct a little sociological research on your own. Ask different people about the meaning of the words "spirit", "spiritual". You will be surprised at what different meanings your interlocutors will put into these words. For some people, they will be associated with religion, the church (for example, "spiritual music"). Professional cultural figures are likely to note that spirituality is synonymous with creativity for them. Most people associate the concepts of "spirit", "spiritual" with ideas about higher goals and meaning. human life about the moral character of the individual.
The ambiguity of interpretations, on the one hand, testifies to the importance of these concepts, and on the other hand, makes it difficult to scientifically define them. In this paragraph, we will try to consider the social meaning of the concepts of "spiritual activity", "spiritual values", "spiritual world of man". We have to find out what place spiritual activity occupies in the overall structure of activity, how scientists study various aspects of the spiritual life of society, how spiritual values affect the development of the individual.

CREATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF SPIRITUAL VALUES

We will proceed from the definition of activity already known to you as a conscious, expedient activity of people aimed at changing nature and society. As a result of social activity, objects are created that satisfy the diverse needs of people: tools, food and clothing, government and cultural institutions, works of art, architectural ensembles, and scientific works. That side of human creative activity, which is aimed not at the processing of the "substance of nature", but at the processing of "people by people", i.e., ultimately

2 5 312 0

What associations do you have when you hear the word "freedom"? The first thing that comes to mind is the ability to do what you want without restrictions.

Freedom implies the possibility of choice. So why don't we do what we like?

Why do we get up and go to work in the morning, listen to and tolerate incorrect remarks from management, worry about what people will think of us, and so on. What prevents us from being free, and is freedom really the ability to do what you want? Let's figure it out.

Interpretation of the concept from different sources

To answer this question, consider how etymology interprets the concept of the word "freedom".

In ancient documents, this word is found only as an adverb, as an adjective.
The Old Russian words "svobod" and "svobod" are compared with the ancient Indian word "svapati", which means one's own master ("svo" - one's own, "pati" - master, lord).

If we consider briefly the history of the development of the concept of the word freedom, then it changed its definition from freedom in creative expression to the freedom to go beyond the usual and see not only a solution to a problem or the result of a goal, but also see many options for behavior in a given situation.

The American psychologist Rollo Rees May defined freedom as a unique opportunity for an individual to see a wide range of possible options for action in any situation that happens to a person.

And this choice is the wider and more diverse, the more developed the self-awareness of this person and his ability in the imagination to choose the desired behavior for specific situation.

The more opportunities a person has to change the situation, the wider the choice of ways to respond to what is happening, the more free she is.

A person is able to project what is happening on himself. But if he does not see opportunities due to the fact that he does not know something or is afraid, then he misses these opportunities, and misses them consciously. Not wanting to get rid of unnecessary addiction, but preferring to sit and regret.

Those people who live according to such principles and do not want to change anything, . And they will willingly praise their living conditions, so as not to seem to you unfulfilled in their careers, business, personal lives. This is also an addiction, fear of what people will say. Another self-deception.

Not everyone can take responsibility. It is much easier to blame others for your problems or your failure.

But if a person strives for freedom, then he will free himself from such dependencies step by step.

There is this aphorism: There is a monument to freedom (Statue of Liberty), but, unfortunately, there is no monument to responsibility».

What is true freedom

Freedom is a state of a person in which she (the person) is the main initiator of her actions not dictated by any other factors.

Freedom has several more definitions:

In ethics, the word freedom is understood as the voluntary adherence to moral norms and principles. The concept of freedom of conscience corresponds to philosophical and ethical understanding, and allows a person to independently form his own worldview, without violating generally accepted norms and principles.
Philosophy defines this word as an opportunity for a person to express his will, based on the knowledge of the laws of the evolution of society and nature.
In the concept of law, freedom is when all actions of an individual are subject to laws enshrined in a legislative document (this includes freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.).

Even Immanuel Kant argued that a person can be free only when he obeys not another person, but a universally binding law.

The article “Two Concepts of Freedom” by Isai Berlin is considered a classic of freethinking. In it, political freedom is divided by the author into negative and positive.

Summarizing his reasoning, we can conclude that negative freedom This is the freedom of action of a person, in which other people do not interfere. A positive freedom- this is the ability of a person to perform any action independently, based only on his own interests, without taking into account the interests of other people.

Based only on these definitions, we can conclude that a completely free person cannot be due to three reasons:

Human actions should not infringe on the interests of other people.
They must comply with the moral standards accepted in society.
They should not violate the laws of the state in which he lives, and even more so be a threat to the lives of others, here the law acts as a restriction.

So is freedom a myth, a ghost? Not really. A person cannot exist outside of society. Therefore, it is worth considering the freedom of a person without separating him from society.

According to Marxism, the individual and society are a single whole, and the essence of a person is determined by the social conditions in which he is.

By changing these social conditions, adapting them to himself, a person changes himself. It is necessary to consider the real conditions in which a person lives, and not artificial or hypothetical, in which not a single subject will find himself during the entire period of his life.

Each person must voluntarily participate in the development of the society in which he lives.

As an example, different levels of development of states. They try to get into some states and obtain citizenship, while they flee from others without looking back. The reason is the number and level of opportunities provided. These factors determine the level of external freedom of a person.

We can conditionally distinguish four parts of freedom:

Political.
Economic.
National State.
Individual rights.

People experience fears that fetter their inner freedom. You can not talk about the fear of losing money, fame, power. People with such fears are addicted, and, most likely, this addiction is conscious. Therefore, they are unlikely to be attracted by inner freedom. It's like trying to persuade a person with an alcohol addiction to go to treatment. He understands that this is necessary, that it is for his good, but he still drinks further and does not try to change anything.

And if a person is afraid of losing housing, work, family, health, these are already important and significant components of life. Here freedom appears already as a necessity. The need to make independent decisions, and be ready to be responsible for them. Realizing that the decision could be wrong, that it was not possible to take into account all the risks.

The absolute responsibility for one's life lies only with a person, and this can be called true freedom.

What is expressed

Freedom is expressed in the ability to choose the best for oneself from all options, while not affecting the interests of other people, without violating the law and following one's own principles of morality and morality.

The feeling of free will enables a person to feel himself the creator of his life.

Only if a person feels that he affects the world with his actions, he can change this world and make it the way he wants.

This feeling of freedom of choice makes a person the author of his own destiny. A person, influencing the world and receiving feedback from it on his actions, learns new things, gains experience, learns the world, himself, lives. With a sense of freedom, a person has an understanding that he is responsible for his life.

How to feel free

A person feels as free as he can afford it.

For the most part, a person drives himself into a framework, from which he then tries to get out. From childhood, prohibitions and all kinds of restrictions remain: don’t do this, it’s impossible. From birth, a person is not free. First, he depends on his parents, then on school, university, friends, environment. He is still trying to get his life experience, but he is being imposed on a “ready-made”, proven path. But what about development, which is possible only through the acquisition of personal experience.

Ideas about "freedom" begin there and then, where and when prohibitions appear.

Freedom ends there and then, where and when absolutely everyone

You can do everything. Everything is allowed - it's chaos.

Without "prohibitions" no one will understand what "freedom" is. Even a word

This will not happen.

What is a "ban"? It is the ability to perform some actions and the impossibility of doing others.

Under these circumstances.

To realize the possibility of "prohibition" it is necessary to have a choice and principles of control over this.

There are at least two options. One and zero, plus and minus, up and down, right, left...

Absolute freedom is the possibility of an arbitrary choice from the available circumstances. But man

He always chooses not "arbitrarily", but at the level of understanding the interests of himself, his beloved.

If there are infinitely many possibilities, then the meaning of the concept of "freedom" disappears, -

There is an accident.

If the possibilities are limited, then the meaning of the concept of "freedom" is transformed into

Awareness of limitations and the right to direct your choice to what

Preferably. Awareness of the need.

In this world, everything and everyone has a purpose. The goal is where everyone and everything aspires

According to individual desire, preference and advantage.

Freedom is realized in the choice of the direction of movement towards the goal. real or

If there is no striving for a goal, then the concept of "freedom" loses its meaning.

Freedom begins with the realization of the right to choose a goal and the way of realization, the achievement of this goal, which,

Often referred to as the raison d'être ().

If there really are deterministic causes and effects, then

It is a mistake to speak of "absolute freedom"! In this case, everything is obviously predetermined by something.

Freedom in its "pure" form can only exist where there are no reasons.

Where is there no reason? Where there is Chaos or where there is only one being

Desireless.

Such a creature already has everything. And this being is at the same time

Cause and effect of everything. It can do everything. Because all that It can -

This is everything! From one to infinity.

For such a Being, the concept of freedom, lack of freedom, good,

Bad, cause and effect don't make any sense.

Freedom for everyone else is predetermined by chance and necessity.

The need to limit actions and the randomness of the choice of movement.

The manifestation of the choice of opposing aspirations gives rise to a sense of freedom.

What a person depends on determines his lack of freedom. That from which a person

It does not depend, it creates the illusion of freedom in a person.

And what does a person not depend on? Just because he doesn't need it.

Dostoevsky wrote: "Freedom means not restraining oneself, but it means

Control yourself." "Control yourself" - how is it? Force yourself?

Self-mastery is the ability to limit oneself through prohibitions.

Then what does "freedom" of choice have to do with it?

"Freedom is not something that was given to you. It is something that cannot be taken away from you." Voltaire.

Prohibitions are imposed by external circumstances and other people.

And this is called "freedom" - avoidance, overcoming prohibitions?

Zhongli Quan believed that "Freedom will begin when you stop

Pushing yourself into someone else's imagination."

That is, to feel freedom, there must be limits and restrictions.

Freedom exists only in our ideas about this word, and at the same time it does not exist.

It can exist without awareness of the presence of prohibitions.

"Freedom consists in being dependent only on the laws."

Voltaire.

Freedom of choice is predetermined by a person's knowledge of prohibitions. external and

Internal.

"A free man cannot even want to become a master, that would mean

Loss of freedom" - N. Berdyaev.

Berdyaev is mistaken in the premise that supposedly there is someone "on his own" really

"free".

What is "freedom of choice"? This is an illusion. Everything has its predetermined predestinations and limits of movement. Determined by the "freedom" of circumstances and the desires of other objects.

The concept of "chance" and "chaos" reflect the real, true and absolute "freedom"! Choose from what is and is possible ...

Freedom, as something substantial and essential, is a complete fiction in the literal sense! There is a sense of freedom, not "freedom"!

Everything in this world is regulated and determined in a natural sense.

"Accidents" are only in the minds of people that arise as a reflection of illusions

Interpretations of the mind of sensations of external influences.

Freedom is the belief in the absolute possibility of choice and the independence of this choice from everything!

Feeling the game of all subjects and objects of the world.

Freedom is the feeling of being able to choose from existing circumstances. Which may be random.

If the possibilities of choice are unlimited, then the meaning of freedom disappears.

The belief that there is always an opportunity to change the goal of one's path creates a feeling of freedom in a person!

What associations do you have when you hear the word "freedom"? The first thing that comes to mind is the ability to do what you want without restrictions. Freedom implies the possibility of choice. So why don't we do what we like? Why do we get up and go to work in the morning, listen to and tolerate incorrect remarks from management, worry about what people will think of us, and so on. What prevents us from being free, and is freedom really the ability to do what you want? Let's figure it out.
Tip 1

Interpretation of the concept from different sources

To answer this question, consider how etymology interprets the concept of the word "freedom".

In ancient documents, this word is found only as an adverb, as an adjective.
The Old Russian words "svobod" and "svobod" are compared with the ancient Indian word "svapati", which means one's own master ("svo" - one's own, "pati" - master, lord).

The American psychologist Rollo Rees May defined freedom as a unique opportunity for an individual to see a wide range of possible options for action in any situation that happens to a person. And this choice is the wider and more diverse, the more developed the self-awareness of this person and his ability to choose the right behavior for a particular situation in his imagination. The more opportunities a person has to change the situation, the wider the choice of ways to respond to what is happening, the more free she is. A person is able to project what is happening on himself. But if he does not see opportunities due to the fact that he does not know something or is afraid, then he misses these opportunities, and misses them consciously. Not wanting to get rid of unnecessary addiction, but preferring to sit and regret.

Those people who live according to such principles and do not want to change anything, are afraid of responsibility. And they will willingly praise their living conditions, so as not to seem to you unfulfilled in their careers, business, personal lives. This is also an addiction, fear of what people will say. Another self-deception.

Not everyone can take responsibility. It is much easier to blame others for your problems or your failure.

But if a person strives for freedom, then he will free himself from such dependencies step by step.

Of course, a psychologically immature person is incapable of making decisions and responsibility, therefore freedom and infantilism are rather antonyms, and freedom and responsibility are synonyms. There is such an aphorism: "There is a monument to freedom (the statue of liberty), but, unfortunately, there is no monument to responsibility."
Tip 2

What is true freedom

Freedom is a state of a person in which she (the person) is the main initiator of her actions not dictated by any other factors.

Freedom has several more definitions:

In ethics, the word freedom is understood as the voluntary adherence to moral norms and principles. The concept of freedom of conscience corresponds to philosophical and ethical understanding, and allows a person to independently form his own worldview, without violating generally accepted norms and principles.
Philosophy defines this word as an opportunity for a person to express his will, based on the knowledge of the laws of the evolution of society and nature.
In the concept of law, freedom is when all actions of an individual are subject to laws enshrined in a legislative document (this includes freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.).

Even Immanuel Kant argued that a person can be free only when he obeys not another person, but a universally binding law.

The article “Two Concepts of Freedom” by Isai Berlin is considered a classic of freethinking. In it, political freedom is divided by the author into negative and positive.

Based only on these definitions, we can conclude that a completely free person cannot be due to three reasons:

Human actions should not infringe on the interests of other people.
They must comply with the moral standards accepted in society.
They should not violate the laws of the state in which he lives, and even more so be a threat to the lives of others, here the law acts as a restriction.

So is freedom a myth, a ghost? Not really. A person cannot exist outside of society. Therefore, it is worth considering the freedom of a person without separating him from society.

According to Marxism, the individual and society are a single whole, and the essence of a person is determined by the social conditions in which he is.

Another thing is what a person can get from interaction with society. If a society is developed and cares about people, it can give a lot of options for a person to choose. Choose the type of activity, what he wants to do, what he wants to wear, eat, watch, listen, where to work, live. Each person must voluntarily participate in the development of the society in which he lives. As an example, different levels of development of states. They try to get into some states and obtain citizenship, while they flee from others without looking back. The reason is the number and level of opportunities provided. These factors determine the level of external freedom of a person.

We can conditionally distinguish four parts of freedom:

Political.
Economic.
National State.
Individual rights.

However, this does not mean at all that the individual should act here as a consumer of goods. No, a person still has to take care of his development, of his inner freedom, to get rid of inner fears.

The absolute responsibility for one's life lies only with a person, and this can be called true freedom.
Tip 3

What is expressed

Freedom is expressed in the ability to choose the best for oneself from all options, while not affecting the interests of other people, without violating the law and following one's own principles of morality and morality.

The feeling of free will enables a person to feel himself the creator of his life. Only if a person feels that he affects the world with his actions, he can change this world and make it the way he wants. This feeling of freedom of choice makes a person the author of his own destiny. A person, influencing the world and receiving feedback from it on his actions, learns new things, gains experience, learns the world, himself, lives. With a sense of freedom, a person has an understanding that he is responsible for his life.
Tip 4

How to feel free

A person feels as free as he can afford it. For the most part, a person drives himself into a framework, from which he then tries to get out. From childhood, prohibitions and all kinds of restrictions remain: don’t do this, it’s impossible. From birth, a person is not free. First, he depends on his parents, then on school, university, friends, environment. He is still trying to get his life experience, but he is being imposed on a “ready-made”, proven path. But what about development, which is possible only through the acquisition of personal experience.

You can feel free only by choosing your own path, and following it without deviating. Gradually freeing ourselves from addictions that deprive us of the opportunity to improve both our material and spiritual aspects of life.
Tip 5

When freedom is considered violated

The edge of freedom is very thin, to violate the freedom of a person, sometimes it is enough just to closely observe him.

You paid attention when you watch someone, and at the same time you look him directly in the eyes, then in just a few minutes the object will get angry and begin to show more aggressive behavior towards you.

Therefore, people cannot look closely into each other's eyes. This is possible only when people are united by love. In this state, the gaze acquires other features. This concerns external freedom, but a person controls his internal freedom himself.
Tip 6

Who violates freedom most often

If we talk about external freedom, then it can be violated by people living nearby or making decisions of national or world significance.

Freedom of speech and religion may be banned. There can be war or revolution in the state. It is unlikely that in such a situation a person will feel comfortable and free. There are many factors in life that influence it. But only an understanding of the importance of responsibility for the decisions made can save a person from illegal, immoral and cynical actions.
Tip 7

What threatens the lack of freedom

The lack of a sense of freedom is dangerous for a person by the degradation of the personality, the stoppage of any activity.

Not feeling the desire to create their own destiny and gain new life experience, to learn and know themselves, a person simply loses interest in life.

Without a sense of freedom, a person will only exist. Conclusion

Conclusion

In order to expand free will and, as a result, freedom of choice, a person must constantly work on his self-development, learn, learn new things. Only by comparing yesterday's self with today's self can a person trace the degree of his development. What is a ceiling for one person may be only a floor for another. You should not be equal to other people's successes, you have your own.

The meaning and purpose of history (collection) Jaspers Karl Theodor

1. The goal is freedom

In all the contradictory aspirations of our time, there seems to be one demand that unites everyone. All peoples, all people, representatives of all political regimes unanimously demand freedom. However, in understanding what freedom is and what makes its realization possible, everyone immediately disagrees. Perhaps the deepest contradictions between people are due to their understanding of freedom. What one sees as the path to freedom, another sees as the exact opposite of it. Almost everything that people strive for is done in the name of freedom. In the name of freedom, they even take the path of slavery. The possibility of giving up freedom by the power of a free decision seems to be another higher freedom. Freedom breeds enthusiasm, but freedom breeds fear. Sometimes it even seems that people do not want freedom at all, moreover, they strive to avoid the very possibility of freedom.

From the moment the understanding of the great crisis of the West, with the French Revolution of 1789, penetrated into the consciousness of people, anxiety for human freedom seized the whole of Europe. The most prominent people saw the possibility of losing freedom. If Hegel could still calmly consider world history as the history of freedom in consciousness and reality, then people who experienced a deeper spiritual shock were horrified by the possibility that freedom would be completely lost by people. Now this question has completely passed into the sphere of politics and social organization: such great minds as Burke, Benjamin Constant *, Tocqueville, Max Weber, were primarily occupied with the problem of freedom. Our contemporaries, a number of thinkers in all countries of the world - W. Lipman, Ferrero, Hayek, Repke * - conjure people to share their anxiety. They include economists, historians, writers who are not affiliated with any party; they call on all people to save that one, true common good, without which a person ceases to be a person.

Philosophical concept of freedom. It is customary to talk about political freedom, public, personal, economic, religious freedom, freedom of conscience, freedom of thought, press, assembly, etc. Political freedom is at the forefront of discussions. Already here there is no unanimous answer to the question of its essence.

If by freedom we understand the participation of all citizens in the will of the whole, their access to knowledge and activity, then history shows that only in the West were attempts made to gain political freedom. But even here, their implementation in most cases ended in failure. These attempts help us understand what caused the disappearance of freedom in Athens, in Rome. In our time, the most pressing question for Europe, for all mankind, is whether our path leads forward to freedom, or again to its disappearance for indefinable times.

Everything that happens, of course, depends on people. There is nothing that can be considered inevitable. All human activity, above all spiritual, consists in finding our way among the possibilities open to us. It depends on us, on each of us, what will happen, although an individual person never prejudges the course of historical development.

The concept of political freedom becomes purely external and distorted if it is not based on the deep meaning of freedom, which should be considered the realm of human being and behavior. Let us try to give a philosophical definition of this essence of freedom.

1. Freedom is overcoming that external which still subjugates me. Freedom arises where this other is no longer alien to me, where, on the contrary, I recognize myself in the other, or where this externally necessary becomes a moment of my existence, where it is known and has received a certain form.

However, freedom is at the same time overcoming own arbitrariness. Freedom coincides with the inherent necessity of the true.

Being free, I want not because I want to, but because I am sure of the justice of my desire. Therefore, the claim to freedom means the desire to act not out of arbitrariness or out of blind obedience, but as a result of understanding. Hence the claim that, by anchoring the origins of all things, we proceeded in our desires from our own origins.

However, it is easy to make a mistake. Arbitrariness again appears as a claim to the right to have one's own opinion; and the premise here is that every opinion is valid because someone defends it. However, opinion is not yet understanding. And freedom requires overcoming what is just opinion.

This overcoming is accomplished through the limitations that we, as individuals, impose on ourselves in our coexistence with others. Freedom is realized only in the community of people. I can be free to the extent that others are free.

Retreating before reasoned understanding, what is mere opinion disappears in the struggle of love between neighbors.

At the stage of a certain socio-political state, opinion turns into the consciousness of objective truth through a public clash of opinions, in the recognition of different opinions, but only in their movement and demarcation.

Freedom requires two things: the depth of human communication between individual people existing in their own self and conscious activity in the name of freedom of social conditions through joint understanding and the formation of will.

However, absolute truth, and thus complete freedom, is never achieved. Truth along with freedom is on the way. We do not live in an eternal perfect harmony of souls, but in a temporary process of a never-ending need for transformation.

2. Freedom requires that nothing be left out. Everything that has being and meaning must acquire its right. The condition of freedom is the ultimate latitude. Therefore, the content of freedom is revealed in life, full of polarities and contradictions.

Each position is opposed by a position opposite to it. Freedom is everything in its own way. She is ready to perceive everything that comes from outside, not only as an opposite, but also to introduce it into herself. Freedom is the mind of boundless openness; the ability to listen and freedom are in this true open space of the broadest consciousness the determination of a historical decision. That is why freedom seeks these fruitful polarities, where one side would perish without the other.

Freedom is lost where polarities are abandoned in favor of limitation—whether in a social order that forgets its own boundaries, or in extremes that vehemently deny that order, or in any one pole that regards itself as a whole.

On the contrary, we regain freedom where we are open, where we preserve the possibilities given to us in the tension of opposites, where in the course of changing situations we make a decision based on our historical origins and perceive being in its new content without prejudice.

3. If freedom coincides with the necessity of the true, it always remains fragile; for we never have the assurance that we are in full possession of the ultimate truth. Our freedom is defined differently; it is not causa sui. If it were, man would be a god. True freedom is aware of its limits.

In his subjectivity the individual man has the knowledge of origins: that I am not free in my own nature, on the contrary, precisely where I feel myself truly free, I know that I am gifted to myself by some transcendent basis. I may not be for myself - this is the mysterious boundary that corresponds to the possible experience of being gifted to myself. Therefore, the existence that we can be, only together with the transcendence, thanks to which we exist. Where existence is sure of itself - where freedom becomes clear to itself - it simultaneously becomes sure of transcendence.

In objectivity of a free community of people, the freedom of the individual is linked to the freedom of all others. Therefore, political freedom cannot be a final and guaranteed state. Freedom is on the way here too.

4. Freedom seems impossible - polarities give rise to alternatives: I have to make a specific decision at every given moment - to understand for what and in the name of what I live. I cannot be everything and I must stand on one side, fight against what I myself recognize as inevitable.

Indeed, freedom is the path of man through time. He moves towards freedom, claiming freedom. Therefore, movement and dialectics are inherent in freedom.

This movement seems to be possible in thinking thanks to mind. By reason we mean the omniscient openness, which in every act of reason is something more than reason. Reason gives us an idea of the true, using the forms of rational thinking for this. Through their deployment, the mind tries to establish a system of unity for everything conceivable. However, at the same time, he rushes to the contradictory. Thus reason is the driving force that brings reason to the point where it fails. Reason accepts opposites, however, going beyond the sphere of reason, it is also a force capable of uniting them. The mind seeks to prevent a final separation in anything. He wants to overcome the alternatives of reason. Thus, the mind connects what it simultaneously brings to the last degree of polarity: the world and transcendence, science and faith, the structuring of the world and the meditation of eternal being. Therefore, reason is the highest dialectic - with the help of consciousness, reason brings the actual dialectic to its final conclusions.

However, the overcoming of opposites is limited by concrete alternatives to the real situation. This constantly happens where thinking cannot remain in itself, where its expression in time and space is required. Only those who are able to make a decision are free here. When making a decision, a person takes upon himself the unfreedom chosen by him. Rejecting various possibilities, he freely implements his decision, but at the same time limits himself. Through this realization, freedom receives content, but receives it on the way to unfreedom.

Freedom cannot be owned. There is no isolated freedom. Therefore, the individual sacrifices his frozen empty freedom in the name of that freedom that can only be won in cooperation with others.

This freedom comes only with human change. It cannot be created by means of institutions forcibly introduced into a community of unaltered people; it is related to the nature of communication between people who are ready to change. Therefore, freedom as such cannot be planned, but people, in the course of correct planning of specific tasks, jointly acquire freedom.

To bring people to freedom means to bring them to a state where they will open up to each other in conversation. However, this is not yet free from deception, if at the same time some unspoken ulterior thoughts remain, if there are reserves that are resorted to, internally interrupting communication with the interlocutor, if the statement, in essence, lies an attempt to hide something, deceive or cheat . Genuine communication is sincere and frank. Truth is born only in complete mutual openness.

Both a calm philistine existence within the framework of accepted conventions and submission to dictatorial power are incompatible with truth, and thus with freedom, when there is only one established worldview for everyone and one can express one’s thoughts only in appropriate phrases that penetrate even into private letters; just as incompatible with truth and freedom is fanatical pathos, with which the possession of truth is declared aggressively and offensively to others and which, in essence, is aimed only at humiliating others. In this fanatical emphasis on truth, the lack of it is manifested precisely in insufficient communication.

In reality, no one has the ultimate absolute truth. To seek truth means to be constantly ready to communicate and to expect this readiness from others. With someone who really strives for truth, and therefore for communication, one can speak with complete frankness about everything, and he himself can talk about everything, but in such a way as not to offend and at the same time not spare the one who really wants him listen. The struggle for truth in conditions of freedom is the struggle of love.

Do we know, after all this reasoning, what freedom is? No. However, this is explained by the very essence of freedom. To the reproach that all the above provisions did not make clear to us what freedom is, we should answer: freedom is not an object. It does not have a real existence in the world that we, by observing, could explore. Freedom as a subject of scientific knowledge does not exist. Therefore, freedom cannot be defined by a firmly established concept. However, what is not available to my objective knowledge, I can mentally embrace, bring thoughts in motion to a conceptual presence - and then talk about freedom as if it really exists. At the same time, of course, a tangle of many misunderstandings arises.

Power and political freedom. Theoretically thinking about what is desirable and reasonable, we easily forget about the main reality, about power, which is present in our lives every day, albeit in a hidden form. Power cannot be bypassed. However, if there is no such human existence where power is not present as an inevitable reality, regardless of whether each individual is aware of it or not, if power, as such, is evil (Burkhardt), then the question arises: how to divert power really necessary sphere, how to turn it into a moment of order, acting up to that limit, beyond which there is almost no need for it to manifest itself? In other words, how to eliminate the inherent evil of power?

The struggle between legality and violence that has been going on in history since time immemorial provides the answer to these questions. Justice must be carried out by law, on the basis of some ideal law, on the basis of natural law. However, this ideal law finds its real embodiment only as the historical law of a society that creates laws for itself and obeys them. The freedom of a person begins from the moment when the adopted laws come into force in the state in which he lives.

This freedom is called political freedom. The state in which freedom based on laws operates is called legal state. A state governed by the rule of law is a state in which laws are adopted and amended only by legal means. In democratic states, it is the will of the people, their activities or participation, expressed directly or indirectly through their representatives, periodically elected through free elections, invested with their confidence. We call a state free if it has sovereignty in relation to other states. However, speaking of political freedom, we have in mind the freedom of the people, which is the internal freedom of its political state. The external freedom of the state can be combined with internal despotism and lack of freedom. The external lack of freedom of the state usually, although not always, entails, along with the loss of sovereignty, internal lack of freedom. For if the state power that enslaves its subjects strives for political freedom, it can allow this within the framework of a dependent state only to the extent that the subjects enslaved by it become independent members of an all-embracing state.

The strength of internal political freedom initially grows, however, only from the political self-education of the people, constituting itself as a political nation. Departing from this state, such a nation can awaken and liberate other peoples. However, these liberated peoples remain politically students and must humbly give up the proud consciousness that they are the creators of their freedom.

All this sounds very simple; one gets the impression that it is enough for people to show due understanding and good will in order, by virtue of natural law and the legality arising from it, to live in conditions of ideal freedom. However, firstly, law is always specific to each given historical situation - that is why laws change in accordance with changed conditions; secondly, it is necessary to curb the power that is always ready to break the law - hence the violence based on the law directed against the crime.

Where there is violence, we experience fear: where the law reigns, we live in peace. The actions of the authorities cannot be foreseen, they are arbitrary, the individual is defenseless and completely dependent on them. The law can be foreseen, it brings order, the individual finds in it the protection of his existence. In the conditions of legality reigns spontaneity, freedom and peace. Silence and secrecy, coercion and restlessness reign in conditions of violence. In a state governed by the rule of law trust prevails, in a state of violence - a general distrust of each other.

Trust needs a firm footing, an unshakable foundation, something so universally respected that any violator can without any difficulty be declared a criminal and expelled from society. This invincibility of trust is called legitimacy.

Max Weber distinguishes three types of legitimate authority: traditional(faith in the holiness of long-established traditions), rational(faith in the legality of the existing order and those who are called to exercise power in them) and charismatic(belief in holiness, heroism, or the unattainable perfection of someone). The bearer of power is in these three cases: established by law ruler, called by virtue of tradition (for example, by right of inheritance) sovereign and charismatic leader.

Ferrero put forward, perhaps somewhat schematic, but penetrating the essence of our time, an alternative: freedom based on legitimacy - despotism and fear within the framework of Illegitimateness (and he considers the charismatic leader as a kind of the latter). Ferrero sees the basis of legitimacy in the hereditary right of monarchs or in the majority of votes in popular elections. The bearer of legitimate power can rule fearlessly relying on the consent of the people. The ruler, who does not rely on legality, is afraid of the people, the violence he carries out gives rise to the violence of others, out of fear he is forced to resort to ever-increasing terror, and this, in turn, leads to the fact that fear becomes the predominant feeling in this society. Legitimacy is like a sorcerer who constantly creates necessary order through trust; illegitimacy is violence, which everywhere breeds violence based on mistrust and fear.

The basis of legitimacy can easily be criticized, seem doubtful: for example, inheritance law can be considered unreasonable, because it also gives legal power to stupid and spineless people, and election by a majority of votes is unconvincing, since it can be caused by a mistake, an accident, committed under the influence of a momentary mood due to the manipulation of the masses. Therefore, legitimacy is always in danger. Reason can easily call it into question. Since, however, the choice can only be between legitimacy and despotism, legitimacy is the only way (especially since mistakes can be corrected along this way) by embarking on which a person can live without fear. Hence the reverence of the intellect for the source of legitimacy. Our era sees it in elections and voting.

There are many flaws in the foundations of legitimacy, much is unfair and inexpedient. People elected to government posts can be fools, laws can be unjust and pernicious, their effect is outrageous. The legitimacy of power protects the elected and the laws, but not completely. New elections displace people, new legitimate decisions change laws. The fact that both of these acts are carried out legally allows for the necessary correction without the use of violence. The consciousness of legitimacy forces one to put up with serious shortcomings in order to avoid absolute evil - terror and fear under a despotic regime. Political freedom is not established as a result of purely rational considerations, it is associated with legitimacy.

In order for power not to degenerate into omnipotence, legitimacy is necessary. Only in the presence of legitimacy does freedom exist, since legitimacy fetters power. Where legitimacy disappears, freedom also disappears.

The idea of political freedom gave rise to a number of basic provisions in the Western world, they originated in England and America, were borrowed by France, and after the French Revolution, by other states, and underwent a philosophical rethinking in the Enlightenment (for example, by Kant).

Let's try to briefly formulate the main points. Political freedom as an internal political freedom has the following features: 1. The freedom of an individual person - provided that all people are free - is possible only if it can exist along with the freedom of everyone else.

V legal relation the individual person retains the sphere of his arbitrariness (negative freedom), which allows him to isolate himself from others. However, in moral attitude freedom is manifested precisely in the openness of mutual communication, which is revealed without coercion on the basis of love and reason (positive freedom).

Only in the exercise of positive freedom, guaranteed by the right to negative freedom, does the thesis acquire its meaning: a person is free to the extent that he sees freedom around him, that is, to the extent that everyone is free.

2. Man has two claims: 1) to be protected from violence; 2) on the significance of their views and their will. Gives him protection constitutional state, the significance of his views and will - democracy.

3. Freedom can only be won if power is overcome by law. Freedom fights for the power that serves the law. She achieves her goal in legal state. Laws are equally valid for everyone. Change of laws occurs only by legal means.

The necessary use of violence is regulated by law. The actions of the police authorities can only be directed against offenders in the forms prescribed by law and excluding arbitrariness. Therefore, there is no need for political police.

The freedom of the individual is guaranteed as the freedom of the individual, the inviolability of property and housing. Restriction of this freedom is admissible only under the conditions established by the law, extending on all. Fundamental human rights are preserved even under the operation of the law, for example, a person cannot be imprisoned without giving a reason for arrest, without interrogation for a certain short period of time and without providing him with legal means for protest and public defense.

4. To the inviolability of human rights as an individual is added his right to participate in the life of society. Therefore, freedom is possible only when democracy, i.e., with the participation possible for all in the expression of will. Each person, depending on the level of his political maturity and the persuasiveness of his views, can count on recognition.

When voting during elections, everyone has equal rights. The secrecy of the vote is guaranteed. The nomination of candidates by different groups of the population is not limited. Through elections at regular intervals, a government is formed. Therefore, in a democratic state, the government can be legally and without violence overthrown, changed in its composition or subjected to various transformations, and this actually happens all the time. In a free democratic society, the same people cannot continue to hold government positions for long periods of time.

The protection of the individual from violence corresponds to the protection of all from the power of the individual. Even the greatest services to the state are not the basis for the inviolability of the power of the individual. A man remains a man, and even the best of men can become dangerous if his power is not restrained by certain limits. Therefore, irremovable power causes fundamental distrust, and even the one who has the greatest power must, at least for a while, retreat after the next election. Under these conditions, there can be no exorbitant exaltation of any statesman, but the one who in the current situation unquestioningly transfers his power to another becomes the subject of universal gratitude and respect.

5. Will is formed in the decisions made during the interview.

Therefore, freedom requires an open, unrestricted discussions. In order for this discussion to be carried out on the basis of full awareness, freedom requires familiarization with all the information available to people, with all the data, with the argumentation of the opinions of all parties - and this requirement is imposed on the entire population.

Therefore, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of speech is necessary. You can convince, you can engage in propaganda, but only in free competition. Restrictions are possible only in time of war, but even then only the communication of information is limited, and not the communication of opinions. Restrictions also exist in criminal law (protection against slander, insults, etc.).

Each person comes to a decision through joint discussion. A political opponent does not become an enemy. Freedom can only be preserved if one is ready to work together even with the enemy. In principle, the discussion has no limits at all (the exception is the situation in which the criminal is involved), the parties strive for joint action on the basis of agreement and compromise.

6. Political freedom is democracy, but it appears in historical data forms and gradations. They exclude the rule of the masses (ochlocracy), which is always in alliance with tyranny. Therefore, preference is given to the aristocratic stratum, which is constantly replenished from all segments of the population, depending on personal activities, merit and success, and in which the people see their representatives. This aristocracy does not act as a class or an elite. Shaping it by education, by testing its merits, and by choice, which can only to some extent be deliberate, is the condition of a free democracy. It is an indispensable requirement of democracy that this elite should not become fixed and thereby turn into a dictatorial minority. Free elections should serve as a test of its merits and subject it to constant scrutiny, as a result of which the persons in power succeed each other and return, reappear on the political arena or leave it completely.

7. The holding of elections and the formation of the political elite are carried out parties. In a free society there are necessarily several parties, at least two. The party, by its very concept and verbal meaning, is a part. In a free society, the party's claim to be the only one is ruled out. A party with a claim to totalitarianism is contrary to freedom. The victory of such a party destroys freedom. Therefore, free parties want other parties to exist alongside them. They do not seek to eradicate them at all. The parties defeated at the moment go into opposition, but in doing so bear their share of responsibility for the whole. They act in accordance with the fact that at some point, with different results of the elections, they, in turn, will be in power. The presence of an influential opposition is a necessary feature of a free society.

8. Connected with the technique of democracy democratic way of life. The absence of one feature would mean the disappearance of the other. The state of political freedom can be preserved only if the consciousness of freedom is constantly alive in the mass of the population, if it is always directed to all the realities of this freedom and people take care to preserve it. It is known at what price this freedom was won, both in the course of the historical process and in the self-education of the people as a whole.

Democracy is unthinkable without liberalism. It must be associated with freedom; otherwise it degenerates into ochlocracy or tyranny.

9. Political freedom must create an opportunity for all other human freedoms. The policy is aimed at the implementation of the goals public order as basics, not as ultimate goal of human life. Therefore, two things are simultaneously inherent in political freedom: a passionate desire for freedom and sobriety in assessing the goals immediately facing it. In order for the social order to afford man the greatest freedom, the legal order must be limited to what is essential. The politics of freedom becomes impure if it gives place to other motives. And impure politics becomes a source of unfreedom.

10. A sign of political freedom is separation of politics from worldview. As freedom grows, religious (confessional) and ideological struggles are eliminated from the political sphere.

In politics we are talking about what is equally important for all people - about the interests of existence independent of the content of faith - about so understandable to all people that with the help of order, law and contract they can satisfy mutual requirements. The question arises, where does something that is not common to all people manifest itself: worldview, historically established faith, all those specific tendencies that need their own sphere of action. Here, the only common thing for all is that such a sphere exists for them.

It is common for a person to consider his way of life the only correct one, to feel every existence that is unlike his own, as a reproach, as an infringement on his rights, to hate him. And this leads to the desire to impose one's own ideas on others and, if possible, to shape the whole world in accordance with them.

A policy based on tendencies of this kind stands in the way of violence, increases violence. She seeks not to listen to the enemy or to negotiate with him - except for appearances - she subjugates him.

Politics, on the other hand, whose source is man's striving for freedom, overcomes its illegitimate impulses and is satisfied with a modest goal. It limits itself to the interests of existence, seeking to provide people with all the opportunities available to them, as long as they do not run counter to what is vital for everyone. This policy is tolerant of all except those who, by their intolerance, promote violence. It follows the path of a constant reduction in violence.

Such a policy is based on a faith that strives for freedom. Faith can be infinitely varied in its content, but what is common for believers is a deep seriousness in understanding the necessary justice and legitimacy of conditions and processes in human society. Only believing people are capable of greatness in humility, only they are reliable in the moral aspect of their political activity.

Since politics concerns human life, as it were, on its lowest level, at the level of its existence in the world - it is true that everything else depends on it, hence the sense of responsibility and passion in political activity - however, it does not directly concern the lofty problems of a person's inner freedom, questions of his faith and spiritual life. She only creates conditions for them.

Let's take an example. Christianity is a matter of faith. A Christian can choose any party, belong to any party, as far as worldly matters are concerned. He can vote communist or capitalist, republican or monarchist. For this or that ordering of worldly affairs follows not from the biblical faith itself, but from the peculiarities of the manifestation of this faith determined by the church. Only a Christian cannot wish evil. Christianity, which has taken on a political coloring, becomes doubtful as a faith.

Meanwhile, since only faith can bring passion to politics soberly limited to its immediate meaning, the modern free world was created by believing Christians.

Another example: scientific Marxism gave an extremely fruitful method of cognition, but as an absolutized total doctrine in the field of philosophy of history and sociology, it turned into a delusion - which can be scientifically proven - into a worldview that indulges in fantasies. The socialization of the means of production in large enterprises in order to eliminate the appropriation of surplus value by private individuals is a political goal that can be pursued, recognizing it as just, and without being a legitimate Marxist.

The principles of faith, as the guiding thread of politics, do harm to the cause of freedom. For the claim to the exclusive possession of the truth leads to totality, and thus to dictatorship and to the destruction of freedom. Under conditions of political freedom, an instinctive distrust of ideological parties develops, which thereby actually lose their influence. Movements based on a particular worldview or belief are hostile to freedom in their politics. For it is impossible to come to an agreement with fighters for the faith. In politics, the whole point is that everyone learns to negotiate and show tolerance, solving those life issues that can unite all people, regardless of differences in faith, worldview and interests.

11. Maintaining freedom presupposes having ethos of living together which becomes, as it were, a self-evident property of human nature; it is an understanding of forms and laws, natural humanity in communication, attention and willingness to help, respect for the rights of others, a constant willingness to compromise in everyday matters, a refusal to use violence against minority groups. Within this ethos, all parties operating in freedom are unanimous. Even conservatives and liberals are in solidarity in their loyalty to these common principles that unite them.

12. Freedom is guaranteed written or unwritten constitution. However, there is no such absolutely reliable mechanism that could guarantee the existence of freedom. Therefore, in a free society, there is always a concern aimed at preserving inviolability the most essential for it, freedom itself, human rights, the rule of law, to protect them from encroachments and from the majority party temporarily in power. The inviolability of freedom must not be violated by the outcome of elections and the result of voting. Such instances are needed that can come into force if the government elected on the basis of a majority of votes for a moment forgets about the basic requirements of universal political freedom (this includes the adoption of repeated decisions after a certain time sufficient to review the issue, a plebiscite, court sessions that establish the constitutionality of the decisions taken ). However, such an instance can be reliable and effective only if it is identical to the political ethos of the people. Both of them must jointly see to it that democracy is not destroyed by democratic means, that freedom is not driven out by freedom. It is not the abstract absolute significance of democratic methods and not the mechanical majority as such that are in all cases a reliable means for expressing the real, genuine will of the people. If in most cases these democratic methods are effective, then sometimes it becomes necessary to put them within certain limits, but this is permissible if and only if the danger threatens human rights and freedom itself. In these cases, in these borderline situations, principles must be sacrificed in order to save the principles themselves.

Tolerance has no place in the face of intolerance, unless it is nothing more than a harmless eccentricity of individuals, which can be treated with complete indifference. There should be no freedom to destroy freedom.

13. There is no such the final stage of democracy and political freedom that would satisfy everyone. Conflicts constantly arise when the individual experiences limitations, going beyond guaranteed, equal opportunities for all, when free competition is restrained, unless this happens to prevent a clear injustice, when the inequality of natural abilities and merits of people is not taken into account, when many citizens do not discover in the laws of the state that justice, which they have already laid as the basis in the sphere of their immediate existence.

Democracy means the opportunity for everyone to advance according to his skill and merit. The rule of law means that these chances are guaranteed, and thus the need to change this legal guarantee, depending on the situation and experience, is guaranteed, but without the use of violence, only in legal forms.

The will to justice is never fully satisfied. But when political freedom is threatened, there is much to put up with. Political freedom is always achieved at the cost of something, and often at the cost of giving up important personal advantages, at the cost of humility and patience. The freedom of the individual does not experience restrictions when politically conditioned justice is infringed, as long as a legitimate, although sometimes lengthy and unsuccessful struggle for a just cause is possible.

In decisive moments always remain necessary elections, in which everyone participates population of this country. but formal Democracy, that is, the right to free, equal and secret suffrage, as such, is by no means a guarantee of freedom, on the contrary, rather a threat to it. Only under the prerequisites described above - the ethos of living together, self-education in the communication of people to solve specific problems, unconditional readiness to defend basic human rights, the seriousness of faith - freedom is reliably guaranteed. Freedom, especially if it is granted to a people not prepared for this by self-education, can suddenly not only lead to ochlocracy and ultimately tyranny, but even before that, contribute to the fact that power will be in the hands of an accidentally rising clique, since the population, in essence, does not know what it is voting for. Then the parties lose their meaning. They are no longer organs of the people, but self-satisfying organizations. They nominate to the highest state posts not the elite, but routine “parliamentarians” and spiritually dependent people.

How true democracy is protected from ochlocracy and tyranny, from random cabals and spiritually dependent people, is a vital issue of freedom. Need to create deterrents, capable of counteracting the suicidal tendencies of formal democracy. The absolute sovereignty of the majority that happened to be in power at the moment must be limited to something stable, which, however, since its functions are carried out by people, in turn, can only be based on humanity and a genuine desire for freedom inherent in the population as a whole. It must, in the final analysis, choose the restraining instances mentioned, but in such a way that they do not include parties that otherwise could come to autocracy.

14. It all depends elections. It is known what ridicule democracy is subjected to, what contempt the results of the elections cause. It is easy to detect obvious errors and distortions, it is also easy to declare the results of elections and decisions taken by the majority of votes as absurd in a number of cases.

However, in objecting to this, it should be constantly repeated: there is no other way to freedom, except for the one indicated by the will of the whole people. Only with complete contempt for all people, with the exception of oneself and one's friends, can one choose the path of tyranny. This path leads to the self-appointment of separate groups, supposedly called upon to dominate slaves who are not able to determine their fate and need guardianship; the views of these slaves are shaped by propaganda, and the horizon is narrowed by artificial barriers. At best, this may, by the will of fate, lead to a mild dictatorship.

Both appeal to the people: both the democrat and the tyrant. The world has entered an age when whoever wants to rule over a people must speak certain phrases. The people are addressed both by the demagogue who plots crime and deceit, and by the one whose intentions are noble, who serves freedom. Which of them will succeed - only the people can decide; thus he predetermines his own fate.

However, if this is the final decision to be made by the people, then everything possible must be done to help them make the right decision. Tyranny invents methods that, in the deafening roar of the electoral campaign, give the appearance of the will of the people, by which people learn a lot (to serve as a useful tool for political struggle), but remain unable to make their own judgment. On the contrary, democracy, since the outcome of the elections has remained its only legal means, tries to make the elections the true expression of the genuine, unchanging will of the people.

The only effective means for this is to introduce all people to knowledge, to awaken their will, so that they learn, by thinking, to gradually become aware of it. People should by no means be taught, as in school, only technical methods and skills (if they learn only this, they will turn into only instruments of slavery capable of fulfilling fascist demands: to believe, obey, fight). In order to make an independent judgment, we humans need to learn to think critically and understand, we need the world of history and philosophy. In the process of constant growth in education, it is necessary to raise the entire population to more high level to lead him from partial to complete knowledge, from random momentary thoughts to methodical thinking, so that each person rises above dogma and ascends to freedom.

This is the hope that the majority of people will reach a level in their development that will allow them to consciously and deliberately make the best decision in the course of elections.

The second way is the practical self-education of the people through the participation of the majority in solving specific problems. Therefore, for the development of a democratic ethos, a free and responsible communal administration is necessary.

Only what people learn in their daily practice, what they constantly do in a narrow area of their lives, can make them mature enough for democratic activity on an ever larger scale.

The third way is to organize the election campaign itself. The form of the election is of great importance - the nature of the vote (by roll call or by lists), the calculation of the results of the vote (majority or proportional), direct or indirect elections, etc. There is no single correct type of election. However, the nature of the elections may predetermine the course of events.

Genuine elections are the decisive factor in the preservation of freedom and the rule of law, in the elimination of despotism and terror. The hallmark of despotism is the elimination of genuine choices, replacing them with the semblance of choices, through which despotism seems to do justice to the striving for freedom that is rooted in our time. The elimination of genuine elections is reminiscent of the executions of kings in the past; now the execution is carried out over the sovereignty of the people. The destruction of the sources of legitimacy immediately entails monstrous violence and the destruction of freedom.

Observing the events of the French Revolution, Tocqueville penetrated deeply into the meaning of what constitutes submission to the majority. In all those cases when they bowed to the human mind, showed boundless confidence in its omnipotence, its right to any transformation of laws, institutions and mores, this was, in essence, not so much a bow to the human mind as to one's own mind. “Never before,” writes Tocqueville, “have there been so little confidence in reason in general, as was characteristic of those people.” They despised the crowd and God almost equally. “True, respectful submission to the will of the majority was as alien to them as submission to the will of God. Since that time, such a duality of character has become a distinctive feature of almost all revolutionaries. At the same time, they are very far from the respect that the British and Americans show for the opinion of the majority of their compatriots. They are proud of their reason and trust it, but without arrogance; wherefore there reason led to freedom, while with us it invented only new forms of slavery.”

WITH long time ago argue that one vote in itself has no value. Voting is not worth the trouble. All this procedure causes only disappointment in publicity, reduces the significance of meaningful activity in self-consciousness. This is indeed an important problem in the formation of the beliefs of a democratically minded modern man. Even if we assume that one vote is almost irrelevant, then after all, the decision is still made by the sum of votes, each of which is this one vote. Therefore, in our day, the conviction could also be affirmed: I vote with all seriousness and responsibility, although at the same time I understand how little the voice of one person means. We also need humility, and in that humility, the determination to do our best. The almost complete helplessness of each individual is combined with his desire to ensure that the decisions of these individuals in their totality decide everything.

Chapter 13 Economic Freedom, Personal Freedom Libertarian discourse about economics, as always, begins with the idea that all people have the right to do whatever they want with their lives, bodies, and possessions. People employed in a business, commercial or economic

From the book Freedom, Power and Property author Belotserkovsky Vadim

Freedom and self-government - freedom, power and property Yes, the reader probably already understood which system-path we mean and consider ideal. This, of course, is self-government based on group ownership of the means of production. Aldous Huxley in his work “Science,

From the book Ethics of Transformed Eros author Vysheslavtsev Boris Petrovich

2. FREEDOM AS THE ROOT OF SATANIC EVIL AND FREEDOM AS GOD-LIKENESS Here is depicted a different form of evil due to an erroneous judgment of evaluation, which Socrates recognized as the only one ("they do not know what they are doing"); but this is not that other form of evil, as the resistance of the "flesh",

From the book The Simple Right Life author Kozlov Nikolay Ivanovich

Goal The second step: formulate a positive goal. This is more difficult. Setting a negative goal is simple: “I don’t want what I have!” Yes, what do you want? If you feel bad in the city, you can go to the railway ticket office and ask: “Please, one ticket from Moscow!” OK, but you

From the book Philosophy of Loneliness author Khamitov Nazip Valentinovich

Chapter 3 Freedom-Loneliness and Freedom-Love 1 The life of a Genius constantly fills him with loneliness and constantly frees him from loneliness. The loneliness of the Genius in relation to humanity is the most complete and, at the same time, the most illusory. No one is so united with the idea of humanity and

From the book Open to the Source author Harding Douglas

36 PURPOSE What is the purpose of life? As I see it, and as the great mystics of all the great religions see it, the purpose of life is simple: conscious merging with the Source. As Meister Eckhart said, "God is in, I am out." He said, "Put on your jumping shoes and jump into God." Jump out of your

From the book THE VERY BEGINNING (The Origin of the Universe and the Existence of God) author Craig William Lane

Purpose If at the end of life's ordeals death awaits us with open arms, then why live at all? It turns out that human life has no higher goal! Many people think that at the end of the twentieth century, humanity is on the verge of either a nuclear catastrophe or a worldwide

From the book Esoteric World. Semantics of sacred text author Rozin Vadim Markovich

Purpose Because a person receives the gift of immortality, he does not live simply to die. God created us for a certain purpose: that we should become His children. I really like the words of the catechism: “What is the main goal of man? Love God and rejoice in Him forever.” Our final

From the book Philosophy. Book three. Metaphysics author Jaspers Karl Theodor

Christian mystery or Zen freedom Esoteric culture (Daniil Andreev. "Rose of the World") Esoteric consciousness (Zen teaching) Esoteric freedom (Krishnamurti teaching) Physician Nikita Danilov Recollection of the participant of the esoteric seminar Vadim Rozin in the best

From the book Favorites author Dobrokhotov Alexander Lvovich

2. Since freedom exists only through and against nature, it must collapse as freedom or as existence - There is freedom only if there is nature. There would be no freedom without resistance to it and without some basis in itself. For example, what at

From the book Philosophical Dictionary author Comte Sponville André

A goal is an ideal or real object of the subject's conscious or unconscious striving; the final result to which the process is deliberately directed. As a philosophical problem, the concept of "goal" has arisen in Greek philosophy since at least the era of Socrates.

From the book Freedom of Servants author Viroli Maurizio

Goal (But) What we strive for, what we achieve, what we want to get, what we want to succeed in. The Stoics distinguished between an end goal (telos) and a goal (skopos). The target is something external to the action - such is the target at which the archer aims. The ultimate goal is

From the book Aristotle for all. Complex philosophical ideas in simple words author Adler Mortimer

From the author's book

Chapter 9