By Abdulillah
We have, as humans, from time to time been given to express our desire to be “free”. Poets, politicians, religious leaders and philosophers apply this word to human aspirations. We use this term assuming everyone understands what we mean, however this is not the case at all. We often hear each other state that we should be “free” to choose what we wish, however we do not define this word or its meaning very well. We are left with many questions as to what we are “free” of or from. Whereas if we stated we are thirsty this statement cannot be construed to mean anything else.
As such I am compelled to try to understand what I feel this term means to me, in the hopes that along the way it prods you the reader to understand what it means to you such that we both can be understood when we use this term.
Since so much has been written about this subject and to great lengths, tackling it in a one to two page article appears on its face to be both ludicrous and most likely impossible. But remember, I am speaking for myself here so either I will fall on my face or be regarded as a simpleton.
That being said I would start out with what some philosophers regard this term to be, as I understand them. They perceived freedom as the “inseparable quality of one’s nature”, whist they questioned its nature, qualities and concepts, such as what is its purpose and how it manifests itself in ones individuality and our social fabric and its limitations.
Some argued that freedom can only be consigned to an individual who has the faculty of will and reason and power to choose between alternatives. Where he would be regarded as an expert in total control of his life and choices and knows how to organize them logically. Others like existential philosophers argued that “every” man regardless of faculty or reason has the full responsibility of his freedom and existence and are as such responsible for their own courses of action. Still others felt it has no limits except those that we imposed on ourselves, either out of ignorance or reasoning and only those who did not encumber themselves with any worldly matters can reach the state of Nirvana.
They all sound good, don’t they? However; they still do not me how to act or decide, they simply provide some definitions, and provide some pretty good arguments and opinions for their reasoning; however do they all fit, or just one in particular? The question here is how “we” perceive “our” sense of freedom to respond to situation.
To understand a bit more I have to admit some things to myself first, and that is the fact that I and all the others around me are constrained by the laws of nature. We for instance cannot control our finite world or its uncertainties or even some of our biological limitations. As such I am compelled again to restrict my interpretations to my feelings about my personal identity and its meanings (inner world); knowing that I have limitations over its total control by the outer-world that I exist in as I do not live in a vacuum. On one hand I am subjectively capable of doing anything imaginable with my ability to take charge of my choices, while on the other knowing the limits of my power. I am reminded of a parable of how we humans as lofty as we may feel we are, we cannot even by our own choice or will take back what a “fly has stolen from us.”
This personally leaves me with the philosopher Van Duerzen-Smith coined fourth dimension, and that is one of the “Spiritual World”, where religion plays a interrelated role within these inner and outer worlds. I have always wondered why the smartest of us, have a hard time grasping the most obvious, while those we deem the most weakest or ignorant of us seem to grasp the obvious quicker. Maybe it is the fact that because they are weak or poor they seem to understand how far they can push the limits of what they feel about their inner freedoms with that of the magnified constraints on their outer freedoms.
As hard as we may try to escape that with the freedom of will there comes a “Pandora’s box” of many issues. That as hard as we might to explain them with reason of words and expression we are left somewhat unsatisfied or worse paralyzed by the myriad of analysis.
For me personally to be free is to intrinsically think and make morally significant choices, such that the “good consequences of these choices (love, compassion, trust, justice, generosity, self-sacrifice, etc..)” are reflected in my outward behavior towards my fellow human beings, knowing all along that with this freedom of will that I have been bestowed, I am limited by the laws of nature of which I do not have control over, except those that I have corrupted due to the poor choices that I have made (an example of this would be to my environment that in turn may affect me and my fellow human beings).
I also understand that as I have this freedom others will also have this same freedom and may use this to commit acts of evil. As such it is really a battle of these two simple acts that occur over and over again when we make our choices.
My fellow citizens, this individual and collective battle that we wage is for a “good” life for us and our families and by extension our world, to do otherwise would a dereliction of the best if all ideals, the ideals that all the moral prophets have called for…the ideal that “all humans are created equal and free” inherently bestowed on us by our creator as well as those under the laws that we accept or establish such that rectification of an “evil act” can take place.
God Bless Jordan and its People
comment replay 