The Freedom Paradox: Towards Post-Secular Ethics - Essay Example

? The Paradox of Freedom (Insert The Paradox of Freedom Freedom can be defined as the ability to act freely - living as you wish without being subject to any undue restraints or restrictions (Hamilton, 2011:23). When analyzing freedom, one can look at the term from the aspects of captivity and liberty. The situation, circumstance or environment that a person may be in is the definitive aspect of freedom. For a person that is incapacitated, freedom can simply mean moving around. However, the freedom of movement can also act as a determining factor of the existence or non-existence of freedom. When one has the freedom of movement, they have the choice to choose where the place they will move to is. They can either choose to move to a good place or move to a bad place. Let’s consider a hypothetical situation where two individuals have made a choice to move. One individual chooses to move to a good place while the other chooses to move to a bad place. Initially, the two individuals are both free, but their choice dictates their freedom. The individual who chooses to move to a good place is essentially free. This is because their choice has made them free. The other individual who chooses to move to a bad place, though initially having the freedom of choice, is not free on the basis of their choice. His choice determines that the freedom in itself does not make the individual free. This is the paradox of freedom. From this paradox, it can be derived that freedom does not necessarily make one individual free; it does not guarantee that one will be automatically free. The freedom of an individual is determined by the manner in which the individual uses the freedom at their disposal. Freedom is highly perishable. Any individual that has a particular freedom or is seeking for freedom has the fundamental obligation of using it wisely. If carelessly used or handled, freedom will automatically degrade due to its highly perishable nature. Another paradoxical feature of freedom is responsibility - responsibility comes with freedom. Any individual, group, or country that has achieved or attained freedom to a certain extent has had to take responsibility for it. A free individual is held accountable for their every decision, mistake or success and have to be answerable over any uncertainties or eventualities in terms of outcomes. Freedom therefore is not a lifeless concept but a concept of life; a living entity proof. Freedom has many forms, levels, and states. Some of the aspects of freedom are on an individual basis while others are on an integral basis. The most basic but essential freedom is the freedom to think. This is an inner freedom that determines whether or not freedom is truly in existence. This is because the freedom of thought is the foundation of all other freedoms. Any kind of assault or annihilation of this freedom results to a restriction of all other freedoms. According to Hamilton (2011: 33), humans deprive themselves of freedom by pursuing their very desires. Man is so caught up in fulfilling his desires that he unknowingly curbs his freedom of thought. He becomes unable to spawn from his ability to think, and this is perilous because it is a fundamental freedom of man. The freedom to think is similar to the freedom to move. Similar to the freedom to move to either a good or a bad place, the freedom to think enables us as individuals to either have good thoughts or bad thoughts. At such a point, the questions that can be and ought to be asked are what are good thoughts and what are bad thoughts. The answer to this questions can be derived by an individual with regards to their beliefs, moral standards, and principles. In addition, the societal perception of certain issues can also be a basis for gauging whether the thoughts that an individual has are good or bad. However, the most standard way of determining the nature of thoughts that are generated by an individual is by analyzing their environment. From the concept of extension, the brain extends the mind by mirroring signals. Similarly, the environment that an individual is in will reflect the nature of their thoughts. An individual that is in a good environment is perceived to have good thoughts while an individual in a bad environment is perceived to have bad thoughts. Corporates too have their own freedom. This freedom is realized and formed from corporate thoughts. Corporate freedom gives a company the choice of choosing its environment. The corporate thoughts, which are a combination of the collective thoughts of the corporate stakeholders, will determine the kind of environment that a company will want to operate in, that is either good or bad. Freedom also exists in religion. According to the various religions that exist in the world today, God has given us free will. He has given us the mandate and power to choose whatsoever we desire and will and worship anything that we may please. However, according to religion, God is omnipotent. This means that God is an all knowing God. He knows everything from the beginning to the end and from the end to the beginning. This is the paradox of religious freedom or free will. From a logical point of view, free will is non-existent. This is because God already knows what we will do before we even think of doing it. In essence, what this means is that every single choice that we make has been pre-destined. We may make a choice thinking that it is a result of us exercising our free will and freedom to think, but considering that God already knows our next move, these choices will be made in accordance to an already set line of thought. The supremacy of God therefore makes it difficult to establish if free will does exist or it is simply an illusion that man has created as a consolation to himself. Conclusion In conclusion, the main paradox of freedom is the inability of using it in any way that makes it feel like freedom. Freedom seems to simply be a theoretical term as opposed to a practical one. This is because no matter how valid or practical a freedom may appear to be, it always has rules and regulations which may not necessarily restrict or restrain its exercise, but will set a manner in which this freedom will be executed. This set route of execution will somehow make the mind believe that it is in full control of its freedom while in essence there are more factors which control the whole exercise. Bibliography Hamilton, C. (2011). The freedom paradox: towards a post-secular ethics. Crows Nest, N.S.W., Allen & Unwin. Read More