CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:109
Arguments:132
Total Votes:147
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 What is Freedom? (81)

Debate Creator

Amarel(4987) pic



What is Freedom?

Aimed at the CD left because I believe they have a poor notion of freedom. But all should weigh in.
Add New Argument
1 point

A totally free individual can do as he /she wishes once they do not break the law or infringe on the freedoms of others .

Individuals will often sacrifice what they feel is their idea of personal freedom for the sake of duty as in accepting a position as a means of supporting a family , they’re may not be totally happy with such but see it as a duty as a feeling of personal freedom has to be sacrificed for the greater good .

The only true freedom is inner freedom , prisoners in concentration camps , prisons and others in what would be deemed dire situations have come up with some of the most remarkable scientific, artistic and literary works , one only has to look at the likes of Hawkings trapped in a body yet free in mind or Einstein whilst working as a patents clerk and coming up with ideas that changed the world

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

A totally free individual can do as he /she wishes once they do not break the law or infringe on the freedoms of others

Your definition presumes that any law is appropriate to freedom. To clarify, if there is a completely tyrannical law, you definition hasn’t precluded it from a state of freedom.

My definition is slightly more basic. A free person is not interred with by another. If maximizing freedom in a population is the goal, then it becomes necessary to interfere with those specific acts that interfere with others. Especially, freedom is the first part of your definition and maximizing it in a population requires the second part of your definition.

Dermot(5453) Clarified
1 point

Yes my definition did not take into account tyrannical law , I presumed and thought it a given that a totally free individual living under tyrannical law would not feel exactly free

1 point

I think I might have heard something like this in the movie the pursuit of happyness:

I would like to think freedom is the right to pursue happiness in life so long as it doesn't infringe on other's right to do the same. I know it's not a rigorous definition, but it sounds nice.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Clarified
1 point

Something sounding nice doesn't make it truer.

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

Most people don’t define these kinds of concepts very rigorously. Though not rigorous, it’s not inaccurate. And there’s plenty in your definition that you could dig into and elucidate if you chose, making it more rigorous.

Freedom is a word used to describe an object. Liberty and independence are words to describe the united state people like to feel but accidently call freedom. The rules of free describe a person conduct as being done without cost or self-value. Which is almost impossible. This is why the word free describes objects, ever notice that the First Amendment does not say freedom of grievance? Grievance is a united state of speech, press, and religion.

1 point

Freedom is to point out what a terrible fucking website createdebate.com is for a debate....!

1 point

There are different kinds of freedom, so it depends upon the context the word is being used within. Political freedom is very different from ontological freedom, for instance. But the general function of 'freedom' is to connote the absence of constraint upon an agent.

Amarel(4987) Clarified
2 points

Considering freedom as an absence of constraint (let’s say constraint imposed by other agents), what do you believe is the role and consequence of freedom in society?

Jace(4706) Clarified
1 point

I'm not entirely certain what you mean by 'society', but I'm going to treat it as though it's calling out a series of interpersonal interactions (rather than some institution). Hopefully that still gets at your question...

With respect to freedom I think of it more as a state of existence, rather than as something with a particular function. It calls out the relative exercise of power between persons, such that saying someone is free is calling attention to their relative position towards those they interact with as characteristically non-constrained by other agents.

Claims about freedom, though, do have a role and this is to negotiate between interests which are perceived as being in competition (and which may actually be). Claims to freedom are assertions of one or more agents' interest against the real or imagined competing and constraining interest of one or more other agents; the function of such a claim is generally as a socially defensive negative claim. Claims against freedom are similar, but generally function as a socially offensive positive claim over and against the interest of others.

0 points

Unlike other left-wingers I do not pretend that freedom is itself a good thing. Freedom is part of utopia but definitely not the ends (rather than means) and is never going to be unfettered if we want the ideal society.

Conservanazi(709) Disputed Banned
3 points

Unlike other left-wingers

You are unlike other left wingers because you are not a left winger.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Disputed
1 point

Shut up and get off this website you abusive bully scumbag ty

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

You’ve only created more questions:

What is freedom?

What makes a society ideal?

Mingiwuwu(1481) Clarified
1 point

Freedom is tolerance of the ability of people to act as they please. In its extreme it's anarchy, in its absence is absolute tyranny.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Clarified
1 point

There's so much to my ideal society, I need to know it will be worth answering in full.

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

Time moves one second at a time from ones own perspective no matter what speed they are going. It only progresses at a different rate between perspectives when different speed perspectives are compared.

I cannot answer on the debate you replied on.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Clarified
0 points

Could you just upvote what you replied to. FactLord stalked your activity and downvotes me to frame you

Anyway, if you think even psychologically that we process time in seconds and not units for around 12-14 milliseconds then you underestimate humans.

FactLord(149) Clarified
1 point

You can't quell freedom without giving someone the freedom to quell the freedom of others and decide what freedoms people should have. So you can either have freedom or you can have an oppressed population with those lording over them free to do whatever they want. Those who write the laws always end up being above the law and the worst abusers in society.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Disputed
1 point

But freedom is not the goal, sustainable peace and happiness are.

Freedom means you can do whatever you want. When you are truly intelligent then what you want to do is what is logical and what is logical for your own self interests also coincides with what is best for civilization as long as you have a real civilization to coincide with, because civilization produces more than anyone can on there own.

Amarel(4987) Disputed
1 point

Not much for sentence structure, are you...

I agree that rational self-interest is a benefit to more than just the self, but what is freedom for human beings; who are predictably irrational for logical reasons?

I agree with you - we are better off TOGETHER. The only question is are we better off as TRIBES or as a whole PLANET?!?!

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

Death threats aren’t illegal if they are unrealistic. That’s why internet threats by strangers are completely legal. They are impotent.

If I saw you face to face and said “Next time I see you, I’m dropping an ICBM on your house”. You might be able to get low level harassment, but no crime derived from the threat itself. At least in my state.

Mingiwuwu(1481) Disputed
1 point

Unlike real life threats, internet death threats have the entire evidence chain laid out for the prosecution team as long as the guy like Andy is willing to give them deleted ones etc. And I know Andy is the type of guy who'd be more than happy to do that to protect the likes of a user like you at the sake of the legal innocence of a user like factmachine

0 points

What is Freedom?

Hello A:

Without context, it's kind of meaningless.. If I'm free to do everything, then I'm not really free to do anything..

So, in terms of WHAT I'm LEGALLY free to do, I like the context the Bill of Rights conveys.. It tells us what we're FREE to do, by telling the government what it CAN'T do. I'm good with that.

excon

2 points

If I'm free to do everything, then I'm not really free to do anything..

Fascinating logic there Excon.

excon(13035) Disputed
0 points

Fascinating logic there Excon

Hello again, hater:

Yes.. It's JEWISH logic.. No wonder you hate it.

excon

Amarel(4987) Clarified
1 point

There’s not a whole lot in the bill of rights. Are you free to go buy a soda? Does it say the government can’t stop you?

excon(13035) Clarified
0 points

Are you free to go buy a soda? Does it say the government can’t stop you?

Hello again, A:

Yes.. Yes it does.. The 4th Amendment prevents the government from curtailing your movements.. You HAVE a right to move around at your pleasure.. The 4th Amendment also prevents them searching you or your house, and your 5th Amendment right to due process of law should make it easy to STOP them..

Hopefully, you're not suggesting that because sodas aren't mentioned in the Constitution, they can pass any law about soda they choose..

excon