Sunday, March 4, 2012

Defining Freedom

Freedom: a concept so familiar, yet nearly impossible to define.

Emerson states, "Free should the scholar be, — free and brave. Free even to the definition of freedom, 'without any hindrance that does not arise out of his own constitution.'" He notes that freedom is the basis of self-realization, asserting that freedom belongs to every individual. Emerson believes that we must accept this freedom as the foundation to our existence, that without freedom, we are intellectually stunting ourselves. Whitman shares a similar view of freedom, that an individual should be free without belonging to a superior. Instead, each individual is equal with one another. Douglass defines freedom as both a physical and emotional state of being; that is, freedom cannot exist without physically and emotionally freeing oneself of restriction. When Douglass initially escapes the slave plantation, he does not experience freedom right away. Though physically he is no longer a slave, emotionally he is still restricted. The final step to his freedom occurs when he begins working for himself instead of a slave master, liberating himself from the confines of the slave system.

Though these definitions of freedom are not identical, their foundations are similar. Each of these authors believes in the potential for the individual to define freedom for oneself, rather than relying on others to provide freedom. It is a state of consciousness which can only be experienced within oneself, allowing for complete liberation from the restrictions of others.

1 comment:

  1. Good. What are the particular obstacles to freedom in each version?

    ReplyDelete