What does freedom mean to you?

[mjolnir]

If some of our behaviors are shaped/conditioned by consequences that occur in our environment, whose effects we don't always perceive, then what would freedom mean to you?

 

[AtreusMacabre]

I see it as a necessary precondition to the full and free expression of my will, while acknowledging that it is shaped and never completely independent of the environment within which it exists and by which it is constrained. The thing is, I experience a deep misalignment or incompatibility with my environment at times even if I cannot immediately explicitly articulate the reasons behind it, especially my social environment. And so that's a signal that you are not being who you should be, or who you are meant to be. But I don't know. I'm still pretty new to this, still learning. I just know it's essential to one's autonomy, self-expression, self-determination, having high-agency as someone to whom life not only happens, but who is actively engaged in a process of constantly shaping and reshaping it according to their core values and vision of the future. Mostly we don't value it until it is snatched away from us, or threatens activities we value highly, and I often think of how we're on the path to being exploited by mega-corporations leveraging our neuro-data for control and profit. Hopefully the future is brighter, and there are more persons asking questions like that which make us stop for a second and think about what those terms mean to us. I certainly did. Thanks!

 

[mjolnir]

Megacorporations are not content with simply selling products. They use neuroscience and the analysis of human behavior to insidiously shape the desires and needs of consumers.
This "consumer game" disguises itself as innovation, but in reality, it is a conscious exploitation of human vulnerabilities.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I think it's a more unrealistic ideal than we realise. We love the idea of having autonomy. Of being able to create our own path in life. In reality though, there are constraints everywhere. Biological/ genetic/ finacial/ situational/ societal limitations.

We also find ourselves immediately embroiled in a interconnected web of emotions- the moment we become alive. Our actions will affect all those around us. Theirs will in turn, affect us.

Of course, some will have that impressed upon them far more than others. They will be guilted and shamed unto complying to whatever their parents/ families/ societies expect of them. Others will be given more freedom. Others will simply rebel. But, our social connections will also constrain and mould us.

Even if we are given vast freedoms to be who and do what we want, we are bound by the laws of the land. Some laws seem reasonable but ultimately- they can actually hamper surely the most basic choice of all- whether to live or die. We don't get free choice over that.

If we make the choice to die, we can only attempt to do so using brutal and unreliable methods in many places. That's not really a free choice. That's a choice we are being forcibly diverged away from. (That's not to say I don't believe suicide needs some gate keeping.)

Also, we are born into a life that requires paying for. In most cases, our parents won't be able to afford to sustain both our entire lifetime and theirs. They bring us here with the expectation we will work to pay for our own lives- and possibly theirs in their later years. So, most of us are born into wage slavery.

You don't give a person a gift and then, ask them to pay for it! That's not how gifting works! We are effectively conscribed into a life subsciption service. Whether we enjoy the content or not. There's nothing that suggests freedom about that.

I suppose largely, I see freedom as a fallacy. Absolute freedom anyway. The whole: 'Life is your oyster' crap. There again, I think to be happy, we probably do need to take the crumbs of freedom we can find.

Something I sometimes wonder about- seeing as I'm unsure on whether there is a God and afterlife. Will there be freedom in the afterlife? Will we at least get the choice say- on whether to enter heaven (forever) in the first place? If not- how is that a 'perfect' world? If we don't get the chance to choose- this time.

Plus- how do you let people choose but also keep everyone happy? We all have different preferences. We even make selfish choices that hurt other people. I'm sure animals wouldn't choose to be preyed upon and eaten! So- is everyone vegan in heaven?

I just don't think freedom even works- when you think about it. Always, we are surely compromising. How do you- for instance- make one person obsessed with free love and sleeping around as much as they can be happy and 'free' living with a group of monogamous individuals who pride fidelity and consent above everything else?

Aren't we always to some degree- having to take into account the freedoms and needs of others? Maybe it's people who expect all their freedoms to be allowed that might create the most nuissance for everyone else. If they insist to always get their way- even if it harms others. How can everyone be free and, everyone get their way- when so many want contradicting things?

 

[mjolnir]

I think it's a more unrealistic ideal than we realise. We love the idea of having autonomy. Of being able to create our own path in life. In reality though, there are constraints everywhere. Biological/ genetic/ finacial/ situational/ societal limitations.

We also find ourselves immediately embroiled in a interconnected web of emotions- the moment we become alive. Our actions will affect all those around us. Theirs will in turn, affect us.

Of course, some will have that impressed upon them far more than others. They will be guilted and shamed unto complying to whatever their parents/ families/ societies expect of them. Others will be given more freedom. Others will simply rebel. But, our social connections will also constrain and mould us.

Even if we are given vast freedoms to be who and do what we want, we are bound by the laws of the land. Some laws seem reasonable but ultimately- they can actually hamper surely the most basic choice of all- whether to live or die. We don't get free choice over that.

If we make the choice to die, we can only attempt to do so using brutal and unreliable methods in many places. That's not really a free choice. That's a choice we are being forcibly diverged away from. (That's not to say I don't believe suicide needs some gate keeping.)

Also, we are born into a life that requires paying for. In most cases, our parents won't be able to afford to sustain both our entire lifetime and theirs. They bring us here with the expectation we will work to pay for our own lives- and possibly theirs in their later years. So, most of us are born into wage slavery.

You don't give a person a gift and then, ask them to pay for it! That's not how gifting works! We are effectively conscribed into a life subsciption service. Whether we enjoy the content or not. There's nothing that suggests freedom about that.

I suppose largely, I see freedom as a fallacy. Absolute freedom anyway. The whole: 'Life is your oyster' crap. There again, I think to be happy, we probably do need to take the crumbs of freedom we can find.

Something I sometimes wonder about- seeing as I'm unsure on whether there is a God and afterlife. Will there be freedom in the afterlife? Will we at least get the choice say- on whether to enter heaven (forever) in the first place? If not- how is that a 'perfect' world? If we don't get the chance to choose- this time.

Plus- how do you let people choose but also keep everyone happy? We all have different preferences. We even make selfish choices that hurt other people. I'm sure animals wouldn't choose to be preyed upon and eaten! So- is everyone vegan in heaven?

I just don't think freedom even works- when you think about it. Always, we are surely compromising. How do you- for instance- make one person obsessed with free love and sleeping around as much as they can be happy and 'free' living with a group of monogamous individuals who pride fidelity and consent above everything else?

Aren't we always to some degree- having to take into account the freedoms and needs of others? Maybe it's people who expect all their freedoms to be allowed that might create the most nuissance for everyone else. If they insist to always get their way- even if it harms others. How can everyone be free and, everyone get their way- when so many want contradicting things?

Ultimately, social coexistence requires constant negotiation between the rights and freedoms of all. If everyone did as they pleased, without considering others, chaos could quickly ensue. Nevertheless, I believe it's possible to expand individual freedom.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Nevertheless, I believe it's possible to expand individual freedom.

I agree although- I tend to observe that freedom seems to ebb and flow. For example, where things like 'woke culture' gets to a point where there is push back. Sometimes legitimately I think. Other times, not.

A supermarket chain in the UK has recently started to label its Christmas Trees 'Evergreen Trees'. Like- really? Do they really think certain groups will take offence at the mention of 'Christmas'? That's a more silly example. Although- not for a Christian perhaps. And, not for those who like believing they belong to a predominantly Christian country still. On a more serious note though, it does feel like America for instance has become more anti trans recently.

I tend to see that happening though- people's rights and freedoms are pushed into public view, sometimes accepted for a time- before being pushed back against. Sometimes in even more extreme and harsh ways.

I wouldn't say my Dad is particularly prejudiced when it comes to actions. He's interviewed and employed ethnic minorities for example- because they were the best candidate for the job. Which is how it should be. He gets tired of woke culture being forced on him though. Ironically- I think it actually makes him react in more racist/ homopohobic ways than he actually is! Or, I don't know. Maybe it reveals what he actually thinks.

I'm not sure that I agree with him. I think the representation of all kinds of people in the media is how we learn to accept all kinds. I suppose really fundamentally though- do we all want to accept each other? I think that's the problem with humans though. We all too easily fall into the whole: us and them or, us vs. them mindset. Me included. I'm not immune always.

I guess it does indeed come down to freedom though. I think people are scared of other people's freedoms and beliefs encroaching on their own. And- the Christmas tree example is one where they have! A big chain store is clearly frightened or keen to appease the non Christian faiths. Even if it means offending Christians in the process. Maybe it's not a big deal but, why was it a big deal to call them 'Christmas Trees' in the first place? I actually think it wasn't. I think they dropped the ball on that one. I doubt people of other faiths would be offended seeing that. But still- the need to appease and back down offends some who feel like they are being railroaded to accept a diminishment of their own freedoms and beliefs.

Rights and money too sometimes. People aren't best pleased when they and their ancestors have paid taxes into a system that then neglects them to help out non natives. Not that they don't deserve help but- I think you can understand their frustration if they feel neglected in the process.

Related to the Christmas tree thing, there was an advert on a bus once that said something like: 'God probably doesn't exist so, stop worrying.' On the one hand, it's kind of insulting- assuming we had sinned badly enough to be worried in the first placeBut, it did cause an observation that- would that have been accepted if they had said 'Allah' or refered to another religion's God? Why should Christians be expected to accept to have their God insulted? It did seem a fair point really. and it relates to freedoms. Should one group let their beliefs and freedoms be steamrolled over by another's?

Regarding the UK and things like immigration- I think we deserve it really. After all that British Empire crap. You can't expect to go and subjugate another race and claim they're now british citizens without them taking that literally and coming to the UK in return. Plus- our ancestors no doubt tried to spread Christianity all over the place. It feels like karma in a way that it's happening in reverse now.

I tend to question though- maybe we can expand our individual freedoms- and we should if injustice exists. But- ultimately, aren't we only as free as we're allowed to be?

 

[mjolnir]

I agree although- I tend to observe that freedom seems to ebb and flow. For example, where things like 'woke culture' gets to a point where there is push back. Sometimes legitimately I think. Other times, not.

A supermarket chain in the UK has recently started to label its Christmas Trees 'Evergreen Trees'. Like- really? Do they really think certain groups will take offence at the mention of 'Christmas'? That's a more silly example. Although- not for a Christian perhaps. And, not for those who like believing they belong to a predominantly Christian country still. On a more serious note though, it does feel like America for instance has become more anti trans recently.

I tend to see that happening though- people's rights and freedoms are pushed into public view, sometimes accepted for a time- before being pushed back against. Sometimes in even more extreme and harsh ways.

I wouldn't say my Dad is particularly prejudiced when it comes to actions. He's interviewed and employed ethnic minorities for example- because they were the best candidate for the job. Which is how it should be. He gets tired of woke culture being forced on him though. Ironically- I think it actually makes him react in more racist/ homopohobic ways than he actually is! Or, I don't know. Maybe it reveals what he actually thinks.

I'm not sure that I agree with him. I think the representation of all kinds of people in the media is how we learn to accept all kinds. I suppose really fundamentally though- do we all want to accept each other? I think that's the problem with humans though. We all too easily fall into the whole: us and them or, us vs. them mindset. Me included. I'm not immune always.

I guess it does indeed come down to freedom though. I think people are scared of other people's freedoms and beliefs encroaching on their own. And- the Christmas tree example is one where they have! A big chain store is clearly frightened or keen to appease the non Christian faiths. Even if it means offending Christians in the process. Maybe it's not a big deal but, why was it a big deal to call them 'Christmas Trees' in the first place? I actually think it wasn't. I think they dropped the ball on that one. I doubt people of other faiths would be offended seeing that. But still- the need to appease and back down offends some who feel like they are being railroaded to accept a diminishment of their own freedoms and beliefs.

Rights and money too sometimes. People aren't best pleased when they and their ancestors have paid taxes into a system that then neglects them to help out non natives. Not that they don't deserve help but- I think you can understand their frustration if they feel neglected in the process.

Related to the Christmas tree thing, there was an advert on a bus once that said something like: 'God probably doesn't exist so, stop worrying.' On the one hand, it's kind of insulting- assuming we had sinned badly enough to be worried in the first placeBut, it did cause an observation that- would that have been accepted if they had said 'Allah' or refered to another religion's God? Why should Christians be expected to accept to have their God insulted? It did seem a fair point really. and it relates to freedoms. Should one group let their beliefs and freedoms be steamrolled over by another's?

Regarding the UK and things like immigration- I think we deserve it really. After all that British Empire crap. You can't expect to go and subjugate another race and claim they're now british citizens without them taking that literally and coming to the UK in return. Plus- our ancestors no doubt tried to spread Christianity all over the place. It feels like karma in a way that it's happening in reverse now.

I tend to question though- maybe we can expand our individual freedoms- and we should if injustice exists. But- ultimately, aren't we only as free as we're allowed to be?

Major brands have no real side. They simply follow whatever direction promises the most profit. Corporate morality is flexible: companies that once grew by collaborating with oppressive regimes — including Nazism — now present themselves as defenders of diversity. Not because they believe in it, but because it's convenient.
The same applies to debates about traditions. When they try to "adapt" Christmas to include other religions, this isn't anything new. December 25th itself — supposedly the birth of Christ — was strategically chosen to replace pagan festivals. History has always worked this way: a powerful group redefines symbols to silence what came before.
Today, this dynamic has only changed hands. The goal remains the same: to impose their own will, shape narratives, and restrict others' cultural freedom — all in the name of their own interests.