you must sacrifice some liberty for secuirity to avoid complete chaos and its been proven many times. The founding fathers built much of todays current government based on this principle.

in the sense of if you have free will at all in life, no. it is scientifically proven that free will does not exist

It really hasn't been.

True freedom is being able to do anything you would like correct? Here in America we have true freedom. Right now I can go out and stab a person if I wanted to, but there are consequences like; jail time, death, bad reputation etc. This would mean that every country has true freedom whether it's democratic or not. So when you ask if true freedom exists, it does and it's everywhere. At least, that's how I see freedom.

True Freedom = Anarchy to a failing government

I believe humans are better at a nomadic life and in that sense, would be able to live in complete freedom. I don't like how people have been drilled and taught that human beings are savages withut government or lack of freedom. We are a species on the Earth and killing eachother because there is no laws prety much goes against our nature. The ones who will kill people won't not attempt to kill in a governed society either. Same with theft. I also believe in a true nomadic/free life style, the ones who are dumb, old, and dying, would die without being able to pass negative traits and genes down to the next generation.

There are ups and downs, but I don't believe a governed society has to be the only way we can live in peace because that's the way we think now.

Also, I think wars do more damnage with a governed society??

Right now, earth has no true freedom imo due to our mindset. We work better together. We don't have to abide by sheer instinct.

True freedom doesn't exist. Freedom is no laws, just anarchy. In modern society, people are becoming scared of gun violence and terrorism and so, even lesser freedom is available today.

real freedom is unachievable unrealistic and stupid as fuck.

You might think that is wrong.

But in order for people to cooperate people can't be completely free, social freedom is possible, improbable

0029 out

lol don't know what else to say

are you guys serious?
i may be biased or ignorant to every discussion thread so i'm going to post what i have to say anyways

i think it's fair for you guys to say "freedom = no laws" but that's pretty off. freedom to me, seems like a relative thing. of course you don't see any countries with no laws, because that country wouldn't exist after that. it would destroy itself, or the provocation it brings to other countries will destroy it. but when i say freedom is a relative thing, i mean as an example, north america has more freedom than north korea.
saying that "real freedom is unrealistic" makes you look like you don't have any clue what you're saying, posting in discussion doesn't make you smart. that's not the point of this thread, he wanted to know if absolute freedom is real, and it is. just because it's not happening anywhere, doesn't mean it's not real.
also, why think so negatively of society? you're trying to make everyone into these disgusting creatures that kill and steal, or whatever. not everyone is a criminal, and not everyone wants to kill someone else.

qma, it seems like that you're simply misinterpreting what freedom means, or at least your definition is different than everyone else's here. When everyone else is talking about freedom, they mean that Joe Schmoe can do literally anything he wants. He can drive 100mph, he can shoot his neighbor's dog, he can strip down and cover himself in blackberry jam in his front yard. Currently, all three of these things are illegal and so he does not have complete and absolute freedom. That is not to say that he doesn't have more freedom than someone in another country, because he does. He can buy a car, he can own a gun, he can fill his pantry with all of the blackberry jam he can afford. But there are still rules and regulations that apply to those things and how he is allowed to use them.


Yes, freedom is currently a relative thing. But there is a point where a person cannot be any more free. That is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow we're fantasizing about.


Yes, pretty much every society that has tried this has imploded upon itself. A society where complete freedom for every citizen can only exist when there is only one citizen.

You just told us why complete freedom is unrealistic. Any society that implements it would either burn itself out or be wiped off the face of the earth. It is possible, but not sustainable. Not until that society can move past its citizen's selfishness and actually work together.



Not everyone. But there is a percentage of people who kill, steal, and violate others. And that's what the laws and punishment system is set up for. To both discourage anyone who wants to do those things, and punish those who disregard those warnings.

I've seen alot of those arguments of freedom that "you can go out and kill someone if you want" etc. That is pretty illogical if you re-analize it again because, to be real if you actually go through a moment in which you can decide to stab someone in front of you, you will not deliberately going to do it for no reason/cause. There will always be an external motor(influence, effect, pressure) that makes you commit any act. Every single aspect of us is constructed by the environment and experiences that we have gone through, like the way we are, our behaviours and habits.
So, our will and decision will be based on our limited experience, knowledge and thoughts, meaning that we will never reach any sort of real freedom because we are 'trapped' in ourselves.

Here is some info about the conduct and habits according to John Dewey.
He says some relevant stuff about the habits and will in his book Human Nature and Conduct:

Habit means special sensitiveness or accessibility to certain classes of stimuli, standing predilections and aversions, rather than bare recurrence of specific acts. It means will. (kl 386)

The word habit may seem twisted somewhat from its customary use when employed as we have been using it. But we need a word to express that kind of human activity which is influenced by prior activity and in that sense acquired ; which contains within itself a certain ordering or systematization of minor elements of action ; which is projective, dynamic in quality, ready for overt manifestation; and which is operative in some subdued subordinate form even when not obviously dominating activity. (Kindle Locations 378-381)

"the idea of "will" itself can be understood as a compound of habits, rather than a self-originating deliberation about ends and means." Habits arise unconsciously, caused by the individual's environment, but we don't choose our environment at first. So by this we can say that WE are our habits, and they build our decisions. Then, freedom may be called an Illusion.