How do philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom: the difference of interpretations
Freedom is one of the categories, with the definitionwhich in everyday life there are difficulties. Everything depends on the point of view. For example, how philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom are very different things. It may seem that the definition of the former should be more abstract, but both the first and the second have their own laws, on which they rely. No wonder they agree in one thing: freedom can not be unlimited. And it can not be absolute either.
Philosophical point of view
In the most general case, the presence of choice is freedom. When there are no options for the outcome, they say that there is no freedom.
In the way philosophers explain the meaning of the concept"freedom" is a manifestation of chance. It can be manifested by the will of man or stochastic law. Depending on this, freedom is perceived and unconscious. The second case contrasts the term "freedom" with the term "necessity".
History of the concept development
Ancient philosophy was inclined to considerfreedom in destiny. Afterwards - in interrelation with politics, power, more precisely, freedom within the framework of political despotism. Neoplatonists and Stoics drew attention to the scourge of human existence, along with the category in question.
In the Middle Ages, the elite was the church thatat that time all spheres of society and human development. Theology, the science of the divine, first of all, reflected on the freedom from sin. Such a view brought a significant discord between the freedom of morality and the freedom granted by religion.
The Renaissance was not only a breath of airin art, but also in philosophy. This period is a return to the origins of antiquity. That is why the definition for freedom has been the comprehensive deployment of the person's personality, for which there are no obstacles.
The Enlightenment brought with it an interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of natural law. It is then that the explanation of the meaning of freedom of philosophers and lawyers, began to intertwine with each other.
Freedom: but if it is?
Marx considered freedom a fiction. According to him, she is a conscious necessity, and everything a person does depends on his motives and environment, which means that there is really no freedom of will and choice.
Legal point of view
The Law Institute representsconstitutional-legal concept of freedom. The way lawyers explain the meaning of freedom, there is a more accurate answer than the philosophers. Let us apply the term "personal freedom" and "civil freedom". They are synonymous with each other. Its definition includes a set of human rights. It is emphasized that freedom can not be in favor of another individual or state.
The legal concept of freedom also sharesfreedom of the individual and political freedom. The term is defined as the quality enshrined in the laws. Political freedom provides order in the relationship between government and society. Speaking of political freedoms, we can not fail to mention human rights.
Freedom as a natural state
Although how philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom are different things, they have similar features.
Still philosophers of an antiquity asserted, that freedomis natural. The same conclusion was reached by lawyers at the turn of the XVII-XVIII centuries. Constitutional-legal doctrine assumes that the basis of freedom is equality for all. It is also true that this category is inherent in all people from birth and is expressed in their natural rights. But nobody has the right to alienate them.
The task of the state is to ensure and protect the freedom of every citizen living in it.
Thus, it is considered how to explainthe meaning of freedom philosophers and lawyers. Definitions converge in the concept of natural law, which allows them to be interconnected, but not directly influenced by each other.