Freedom Definition Essay
Freedom, as being total and absolute, does not exist. This word is used constantly in historical text and our everyday speech. People use this word to justify many of their actions, and saying things like, “It’s my constitutional right” or “I have the freedom to do so.” Oxford Dictionary defines freedom as, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint”; however; I wonder if we truly have any freedom in the world. We are all obligated to go to nine-to-five jobs or required to go to school even if we do not actually want to. We all have rights protected under a government but cannot do whatever we truly want without hindrance. People feel a sense of freedom and power to do things within the parameters
…show more content…
Oxford Dictionary defines freedom as, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint”, but there are multiple issues with this definition. Freedom is not having the right to do as you choose without hindrance because if this was true we would not need police departments or legal systems because nothing would be against the law. Freedom does not come without restraint and restrictions because if it did not, people would wreak havoc and run rampant without end. The Oxford Dictionary definition of freedom may have been true in the past, but in today’s society, it has become the ability to act, speak, or think as one wants within the parameters of what is legally and socially …show more content…
The Social Contract supports this claim the best by stating that we relinquish parts of our freedom to the government for their protection granted that they don’t abuse the trust we give them. This embodies the claim that from the beginning we never had complete and total freedom. A functioning society cannot flourish under total, individual freedom. People would not know what to do with themselves, only acting on impulse and not thinking about the consequences of their actions clearly. Structure is the greatest opponent of freedom; requiring the relinquishment of some freedoms for it to work properly. Basic human instincts are now replaced with civilized ones. Total freedom does not exist in a civilized
Oxford Dictionary defines freedom as, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint”, but there are multiple issues with this definition. Freedom is not having the right to do as you choose without hindrance because if this was true we would not need police departments or legal systems because nothing would be against the law. Freedom does not come without restraint and restrictions because if it did not, people would wreak havoc and run rampant without end. The Oxford Dictionary definition of freedom may have been true in the past, but in today’s society, it has become the ability to act, speak, or think as one wants within the parameters of what is legally and socially …show more content…
The Social Contract supports this claim the best by stating that we relinquish parts of our freedom to the government for their protection granted that they don’t abuse the trust we give them. This embodies the claim that from the beginning we never had complete and total freedom. A functioning society cannot flourish under total, individual freedom. People would not know what to do with themselves, only acting on impulse and not thinking about the consequences of their actions clearly. Structure is the greatest opponent of freedom; requiring the relinquishment of some freedoms for it to work properly. Basic human instincts are now replaced with civilized ones. Total freedom does not exist in a civilized