"Abuse" of Freedom

[Felonious Skunk]

What does "abusing freedom" really mean? Those two words together are often tagged on as sidekicks to more central ideas a person is trying to convey. So for the sake of definition:

Let society define "freedom" to be all activities a person may engage in for personal gratification, or choices a person may make to achieve personal gratification, that do not interfere with another's ability to do the same.

Note that this definition immediately defines activities such as murder, theft, rape, and assault as being "not-freedom."

Activities such as sex, gambling, rock climbing, drinking, sky diving, and drug-taking are activities that can all fall under the definition of "freedom."

But how does society define "abuse of freedom"? This area is not so clear-cut and is often used to justify attempts to create laws that support "not-freedom."

Let's look at two examples of how the "freedom" to use drugs/EtOH for personal gratification can be "abused."

1. A person who becomes impaired on a substance can lose the ability to operate a motor vehicle or machinery and injure other people.

2. A person may become too impaired to work, thus he and his family may become a financial burden to society.

Obviously society has an obligation to address such abuses. But the way it addresses the issue can raise questions about whether that society can legitimately call itself "freedom-promoting" (I won't say "free" because the only way that would technically be possible is if every single member of a society without exception had absolute respect for every other member of that society--an impossibility).

If society has granted its members freedoms to take drugs, have sex with consenting partners without regard to gender, race, or species (that last one was a joke--okay?), and jump out of planes, how should it deal with abuses of those freedoms?

Should it pass laws that take away those freedoms? If society implements laws proscribing activities that fall under the definition of "freedom," then these laws fall under the definition of "not-freedom," and this society cannot rightfully call itself "freedom-promoting."

Are there ways to handle abuses of freedom without taking freedoms away?

Thoughts? Comments? Threats? Bad rep points?

Reputation Comments on this post:

	good post
	good post mate

[x cynic x]

Well, maybe some people can be resonsible enough to use their freedoms properly, but there will always be people who will constantly profligate. Nevertheless, a government will judge the entire population based on the small margin of people who are naturally improvident. Anyway, putting limitations on freedom is one big contradiction itself. We will never have true freedom because freedom is the right to think, speak, and act as one desires without restraint and leadership would never agree with that. I believe that one day people will be able to make the choice of what they are allowed to put into their own bodies, and if you don't agree with that, then no one is forcing you to join in so make decisions for yourself, not others. If someone was determined to destroy themselves with lethal addictions, then I would gladly grant them their will. It is their decision, and that should be respected. Unfortunately, drug laws deprive humans of their natural rights and freedoms they once had before a government proposed laws according to its own interests and benefits. Just like communist leaders say what they do is for their people when it only helps themselves. Freedom existed only before the egocentric era of governing took its hold on a developing society and it may never return.

[UberDouche]

How does that song go? 'Freedom is just another word for nothin' left to lose.', or something like that. SWIM supposes there is a grain of truth in that.

[old hippie 56]

Words of another generation still ring true today. "Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose. Nothing don't mean nothing honey if it ain't free." Janis Joplin-Me and Bobby McGee.

[lulz]

Good post. You don't happen to be studying mathematics or philosophy by any chance?

[Bio-Cellular Enigma]

"Abuse of freedom" is a strange juxtaposition. If freedom is freedom, then would one not be free to "abuse" it, if they were willing to accept the consequences?

It would of course depend on context, but SWIM takes the word fairly literally. To SWIM, if freedom is highly conditional, then it isn't freedom. Most likely it is a bondage of some sort.

SWIM feels he is is free to break the law, if he is willing to accept the consequences. This is in fact the case -- he IS free to break the law, any time he wishes to do so. He rarely cares to accept the consequences, or he simply doesn't see any point in breaking laws, or has no need or desire to, or doesn't want to hurt anybody, so he almost never does it.

But he is free to do it -- to go rob a bank, for example. And doing so would not be abuse of freedom, but the USE of it. So would accepting responsibility for the consequences.

[darawk]

Indeed - one cannot abuse freedom. You either have freedom or you don't, and if you don't have it then maybe you can abuse lax enforcement...but if you are truly 'free' to do something, then it is by definition impossible for you to abuse it.

Reputation Comments on this post:

so much truth in such a short post! Thx.

[wellhelm]

“The True Value of a human being can be found in the degree to which he has attained liberation from the self." – Albert Einstein.

[Felonious Skunk]

^^^^ That quote is among many things he said which make me believe the Theory of Relativity was one of Einstein's more mundane contributions to mankind...

[wellhelm]

Originally Posted by Felonious Skunk

^^^^ That quote is among many things he said which make me believe the Theory of Relativity was one of Einstein's more mundane contributions to mankind...

Really? I am surprised that anybody would call Einstenin "mundane"? Odd? Could you elaborate?

I was just making a point through Einstein that true freedom comes from within. Am I wrong?

What I mean by that is freedom does not have to be something you do phyisically but something you think freely.

[darawk]

Originally Posted by wellhelm

Really? I am surprised that anybody would call Einstenin "mundane"? Odd? Could you elaborate?

I was just making a point through Einstein that true freedom comes from within. Am I wrong?

What I mean by that is freedom does not have to be something you do phyisically but something you think freely.

I think he's saying that the quote you posted and others like it that were said/written by Einstein were more important contributions to humanity than his theory of relativity.

[wellhelm]

Originally Posted by darawk

I think he's saying that the quote you posted and others like it that were said/written by Einstein were more important contributions to humanity than his theory of relativity.

Yep! Sorry bro! I had a couple beers(holiday weekend and all) so my bad and never mind.

[lulz]

Originally Posted by Felonious Skunk

^^^^ That quote is among many things he said which make me believe the Theory of Relativity was one of Einstein's more mundane contributions to mankind...

I think you massively underestimate how profoundly his work in physics changed our collective perception of reality, but I agree that his philosophical insights verged on the mystical. My favorite quote:

"A human being is a part of a whole, called by us universe, a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separated from the rest... a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us, restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in its beauty."
-Albert Einstein

[Felonious Skunk]

Originally Posted by lulz

I think you massively underestimate how profoundly his work in physics changed our collective perception of reality...

Not at all. I've taken college-level physics and read (understanding what I could) several of his books, all of which affirmed for me that the man was a "genius' genius" when it comes to the physical sciences.

But as you pointed out, he was a consummate philosopher as well, and my comment was framed to emphasize this fact, not to downplay his monumental contributions to science.

[stoneinfocus]

He must have liked helping building the bomb.

[lulz]

Einstein had nothing to do with building the bomb, it was just a military application of his special theory of relativity. He was horrified when Truman used the bombs on a civilian population.

[stoneinfocus]

he had contact to Oppenheimer and he urged in personal letter to Roosevelt to build the bomb and a petition, that was made by the bomb constructors and other, to not use it over inahbited aereas, was not signed by Einstein.. he was a Misanthrop, probably interlligent enought to hide it to the ordinary peolple, but letting all others know how the world is ruled..

It´s over since WW2 everything has been explored, scientifically, whatever can be done to mankind with the most sophisticated weapons and means and without weapons, it doens´t get worse than that... it´s over, completely .. we´re fucked, because the majortity is stupid, instrumentalized in any direction wanted, without atrocity or even realizing it, no matter how artistic, cheerful, lucky and convincingly different we seem to others, sharing these feelings with them, for a split second, they´ll all forget this all and us in a fart, and will happiely swapping Leonardo, Schiller, Warhol, The Rolling Stones, Opiates, LSD, Shrooms, MDA; MDMA, Mescaline, Cocaine, Amphetamine, Techno, Jazz, Death Metal, Art Rock, Raves, a brawl, for the latest bathroom inventory show at the local tiler and an every Sunday brain fuck, along a pseudo-christian hedonistic powertrip, as a coce-substitute.

[Felonious Skunk]

^^^^ Ay lad, I had to read that twice to get yer drift. And I think you're probably right--the real war lies within.

[lulz]

Originally Posted by co-incidence

he had contact to Oppenheimer and he urged in personal letter to Roosevelt to build the bomb and a petition, that was made by the bomb constructors and other, to not use it over inahbited aereas, was not signed by Einstein.. he was a Misanthrop

Writing to Roosevelt wasn't Einstein's idea, a physicist called Leo Szilard came to him with the idea because Roosevelt was much more likely to listen to Einstein. Nearly all of the letters that were sent to Roosevelt were written by Szilard, and just signed by Einstein. Also Einstein vocally condemned the use of the atom bomb quite openly for the rest of his life.

[Voices]

Originally Posted by darawk

you can abuse lax enforcement....

That's what the British colonists did, remember 'Salutory Neglect'?

Amereica's birth right lay in the very idea of taking advantage of lax enforcement. I believe it was Robert Walpoole's flare for appointing assholes to Parliament and the British War for Empire that diverted British attention away from the British North American colonies, and while their attention was turned towards war and trade, the British colonists started devising their own system of representation.

[El Calico Loco]

Einstein had that special something that many otherwise intelligent people lack - imagination. There are plenty of brilliant scientists today, IQ-wise, but few have the ability to think outside existing orthodoxy the way he did. There are plenty of people with the courage to withstand threats and arguments, but few with the courage to withstand mockery.

As to the "abuse of freedom"...one's freedom to swing one's fist ends where another's nose begins. One's freedom to stick one's nose in also ends where another's personal life begins. Uncle Al Crowley said it best when that old Satanist paraphrased Jesus: Love is the law; love, under will. Harm no other, and do what you will.

Your freedoms are yours. You have a right to them. Others have no right to threaten you with violence and imprisonment for exercising them, and I don't care if they're following the orders of the king or the whim of the mob. A law's popularity is no indication of its morality.

Slavery, religious and ethnic oppression, and mass murder (war) have been popular throughout human history.


ECL

[zera]

Originally Posted by Felonious Skunk

Are there ways to handle abuses of freedom without taking freedoms away?

Absolutely, social pressure, reputation, voluntary associations, social ostracism, and things like that. A perfect example is the Amish, according to their world view there are tons of things that the modern world does that they would consider an abuse of freedom (that is to say, things that are intrinsically bad). However do they try to take away freedom, through the power of the government? No, instead they have created voluntary communities and allow those in who meet their standards and simply minimize contact with those they consider to be freedom abusers.

A more down to Earth example is the eBay rating system, sellers who abuse their customers get negative feedback and are generally avoided. Government intervention is unnecessary because buyers have created a community that punishes shady dealers through their voluntary action. One last example is NAUI and PADI, the (non-government) Scuba diving organizations. Government regulation of Scuba diving is very scant, but NAUI and PADI have arrised from networks of those involved with the sport to create a set of voluntary safety regulations. Even though the government does not mandate, pretty much every player in the Scuba diving industry conforms to one of the two standards, the reason being is that customers wont use you, suppliers wont sell to you, etc. if you arent approved by NAUI or PADI.

[El Calico Loco]

Originally Posted by zera

Even though the government does not mandate, pretty much every player in the Scuba diving industry conforms to one of the two standards, the reason being is that customers wont use you, suppliers wont sell to you, etc. if you arent approved by NAUI or PADI.

Underwriters Laboratories is another good example. They certify most electrical appliances used in the US...and they predate the wave of government regulation that swept America during the 20th century.


ECL

[stoneinfocus]

Abusing freedom to me means, you spend a considerable amount of your lifetime, to find arguments, why someoe doing soemthing that you don´t like,
shoulld be hated and punished, either by you or any kind of law, doing this, although noone ever would care about you and what you hate so much, in fact, everyone else, that´s inflicted with what you hate seeing, do the same and pretty much like it a fuckin´ lot.(lie dopimng in sports, all athletes say, itßs theri job and that´s how it works, so leave us alone, you never will curb it nor will you ever be satisfuied with what you see and hear about it, because you really donßt want to know)

But because some don´t like all this stuff and spend so much time disliking and hating what they see, and tellign the media, that it´s so bad abnd they´re hating it so much, a law is being made and you are terroriised by the haters and maybe the law-enforcement, which then is called "democracy", but in fact, is pure tyranny.

this is bad, because those who don´t care but are niot especially incflicted will stay out o ftrouble an dthe conservatives will win with their agenda, because the usually do a lot with theri free time, terrorizing others, because they actually have no idea what theri own life´s about, bneing effeminizesd or mistreatd in youth or job, so this is their only job, to fight new streams and defend.

[lulz]