Freedom is one of the categories with the definition of which difficulties arise in everyday life. It all depends on the point of view. For example, the way 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 former and the latter have their own laws on which they rely. No wonder they agree on one thing: freedom cannot be unlimited. And it cannot be absolute either.
Philosophical point of view
In the most general case, having choice is freedom. When there are no outcomes, they speak of a lack of freedom.
The way philosophers explain the meaning of the concept of “freedom” is a manifestation of chance. It can be manifested by the will of man or stochastic law. Depending on this distinguish between freedom conscious and unconscious. The second case contrasts the term “freedom” with the term “necessity”.
The history of the concept
Ancient philosophy was inclined to consider freedom in fate. After - in conjunction with politics, power, more precisely, freedom in the framework of political despotism. Neoplatonists and Stoics drew attention to the disasters of human existence, coupled with the category in question.
In the Middle Ages, the church was the elite, defining at that time all spheres of society and human development. Theology, the science of the divine, first of all, reflected on freedom from sin. This point of view introduced a significant discrepancy between the freedom of morality and the freedom afforded by religion.
The Renaissance has become a breath of air not only in art, but also in philosophy. This period is a return to the origins of antiquity. That is why the definition of freedom has become a comprehensive deployment of the personality of a person for whom there are no obstacles.
Enlightenment brought with it an interpretation borrowed from the philosophy of natural law. Just then, as the philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom, it began to intertwine.
Freedom: and if she?
Marx considered freedom a fiction. According to him, it is a conscious necessity, and everything that a person does depends on his motives and environment, which means that no free will and choice really exist.
Legal point of view
The Law Institute represents the constitutional legal concept of freedom. There is a more accurate answer to how lawyers explain the meaning of freedom than philosophers. The terms "personal freedom" and "civil freedom" apply. Between themselves they are synonyms. Its definition includes the totality of human rights. It is emphasized that freedom cannot be in favor of another individual or state.
The legal concept of freedom also separates individual freedom from political freedom. The term is defined as the quality enshrined in laws. Political freedom provides order in the relationship between government and society. Speaking about political freedoms, one cannot but mention human rights.
Freedom as a natural state
Although the way philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom are different things, they have similar features.
Even the philosophers of antiquity argued that freedom is natural. Lawyers at the turn of the 17th-18th centuries came to the same conclusion. Constitutional and 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 no one has the right to alienate them.
The task of the state is to ensure and protect the freedom of every citizen living in it.
Conclusion
Thus, it is considered how philosophers and lawyers explain the meaning of freedom. The definitions converge in the concept of natural law, which allows them to be interconnected, but not having a direct influence on each other.