“How can you know for sure that you’re free? You do, or say something, and, if nobody punishes or muzzles you, you are free to that extent.” – Peter Schjeldahl
Filed under Uncategorized
deja vu with this and 1984
I think that one really does not know how far one can go in most social interactions. The law tries to clarify this boundary, but then again, one can not be sure of the exact interpretations of the law until one knows the judge in front of which one will be judged. One can truly never know how free one is unless one tests the bounds of the law and comes away without breaking the law.
You seem to assume that law is infallible. But, our judicial system calls for interpretation precisely because law, written by men, is fallible. The quotation here asks, in an unqualified way, to what degree can we assert freedom? It proposes that we can only know freedom through a positivist, logical empiricism, i. e. give it a shot, and see how hemmed in you really are.
The law may be flawed, but one can only know whether one will be punished by the law if one tries something on the edge of the law. The idea of logical empiricism makes sense here because no one truly knows whether the law will punish one even if it is stated unambiguously.
I dunno. If we are following external rules, then sure, that would be the definition of freedom, but I don’t like the idea that the end result of the action defines it, which is what he is pretty much basing his argument on.
What would be the alternative?
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.