- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
These are generally perpendicular things.
Control and freedom are rather murky philosophical concepts. If the cockroach was released from the jar-is this freedom? After all, he still moves like a robot according to simple predictable instinctive algorithms. If the BDSM slave gave the mistress the keys to the chastity belt – is this control? He had freely decided to give her the keys…
Man as a biological species exists in nature. It is made a person by a certain set of genes that give a certain phenotype.
Man as a special animal, unlike other animals, also exists in nature. It is defined by a developed intellect, a complex social life, high altruism to one's own people, the importance of culture and upbringing, speech, and abstract thinking… true, the beginnings of all this are found in some other animals. According to Drobyshevsky, self-cultivation of fire is the only unique sign of a person.
Control – freedom here is generally not sideways.
I think that both are combined. Freedom is given to a person by the Creator, and control should be added by the person (or society). So increasing your freedom is not something you should be doing. It is enough to see the freedom in yourself. But the development of self-control is a thing that completely elevates a person.
An interesting question, to which I instantly had an answer-control.
A person lives in the company of other people. The more people – the more opinions and inconsistencies of these very opinions. If a person were completely free, I think there would be few people at all. A person is held back by law, morality, and analysis of what is happening around him. And an uncontrolled, uncontrolled flow of actions will ultimately lead to chaos and the end of man as such.
Man is a social creature. And once social, you will have to live as this society lives, which implies some rules and control. Of course, there are exceptions everywhere, but they only confirm the rule.
A person is made a person by a combination of two things-reason and will. With reason, a person understands what is good and what is evil. And the will wants to do good. Control and freedom do not contradict each other as long as reason and will work together. Otherwise, a person acts either guided by common sense, that is, controlling himself, his desires. Or, ignoring reasonable arguments, he acts to please his desires, that is, in freedom. The absence of reason in a person makes him crazy, the absence of a desire to act out of love for his neighbor makes him a beast. All such people are only ostensibly people, but not in essence.�
Freedom makes a person human. Freedom of will, freedom of its expression. Without this freedom, man is an animal. Control is a derivative of having a will. That is, if a person is uncontrolled ( and such people are often found), then they are still people. Although with a weak will and usually ignorant.
* There are a lot of objective restrictions on the planet Earth that restrict a person's full freedom of choice. What are the restrictions? An unfriendly environment, fragile health, the need for food, dogmas embedded in the consciousness during the upbringing process, rather limited physical capabilities, in the end-the properties of matter, and so on…
* Self-control of actions is largely due to the fear of being punished or censured by society for disobedience (non-compliance with the norms of behavior developed by the majority). Norms of behavior are an essential factor for the survival of a civilization.
* Bottom line: I believe that what makes a person a person (sorry for the tautology) is the presence of such traits as compassion and conscience, and not ephemeral concepts such as control (violent attempts at self – control or control by society) and a certain freedom of choice. The so-called “freedom of choice” – consists of the most optimal set of actions at a given time (factors of necessity) for survival. These factors move a person far enough away from the true (desired) freedom of choice.
A very long time ago , man discovered the principle of yin and yang. This is the philosophy of the golden mean. We can say that harmony in life is achieved in the pursuit of freedom-as an incentive and the need for control . Or ways to freedom through control. And we can say that if a person does not limit himself, then he will not know the true price of freedom.
What an interesting and difficult question. It is probably impossible to answer this question unequivocally. I can offer my opinion.
Total control makes a person quirky, and forces him to go to deception and all sorts of tricks. And absolute freedom leads to the degradation and decomposition of the individual. Because the freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins.
I am very close to the spirit of the biblical point of view. Only God can have absolute freedom, and the freedom of all God's creatures is relative. Whether we like it or not, we are affected by the laws of gravity, sun exposure, moral laws, and so on. Restricting freedom from people is not always justified. Ecclesiastes 8: 9 says:: “There is a time when a person rules over a person to his detriment.” Restrictions from God for a person only benefits him. No wonder for us, from the pages of the Bible is given instruction: “Let not this book of the law depart out of your mouth; but learn in it day and night, that you may do exactly all that is written in it: then you will prosper in your ways and walk wisely” (Joshua 1:8h). It turns out that both the control and freedom given by God make a person a person and even a person happy.
Let's define the concepts that make a person.
The optimal ratio of external control over the human environment and internal human control over the external environment ensures human homeostasis and evolution. That is, in a word – survival rate.
The optimal ratio of a person's freedom from the environment and his freedom to interact with the environment serves the same purpose.
Thus, freedom from the influence of the environment is inextricably linked with control over it, and freedom to influence the environment is inextricably linked with its control over a person.
Ergo-human beings are made human by the totality of all-encompassing control with absolute freedom.
Since the answer is obvious to me – freedom-I had to think about what makes it not obvious to you.
Perhaps you mean something similar to what Jung meant when he called man a mad animal. That is, to return a person to the framework of a normal animal, control is really needed. Actually, this is exactly what all social technologies and mass consciousness management technologies are aimed at.
In this sense, control is the path from a crazy animal back to a normal animal. Freedom is the path from crazy animal to human. In this, in fact, I agree with Jung and not only with him.
The usual wordplay. A controlled slave and a free slave owner are both human beings. The dependent child under care is a human being.
Hypnotized, stoned, sleeping and not thinking anything – this is also a person.
If the question is about the existence of the individual, then the indicator will not be freedom or control, but Independent Critical Thinking. Hence, by the way, the concept of “development” of the individual, society, and people arises – which propagandists and ideologists of all stripes do not like to admit, who want to speculate falsely about morals, upbringing, and fictional “public interests” that are supposedly more important than the interests of the individual.
I had such an experience, and this is my wealth inside. I'll explain why the picture is above later.
I had a relationship for 2.5 years, to call them just a relationship – to say nothing, I value my love story, and even if it is without a beautiful ending. We lived in the same city, when the relationship began, I knew that she would soon leave, I carefully prepared for such an event, because I did not want to leave everything to chance in my heart. I imagined how we both stretched out this time of parting and kilometers of distance between us, we would tremblingly wait for a meeting, everything was like that. I don't remember how we agreed with each other, but it was built on thoughts about the future, about the future where the two of us spend our lives together. Where we are waiting for a house after work, dinner with the family, walks in the evenings and summer nights with friends. I would list a lot about what we wanted.. She flew to Europe at the end of the summer, studying under a grant, four semesters – four countries. I came to her on vacation, she flew home for the holidays, so the days and months passed, we were very much looking forward to meeting, and when it came, it was beautiful, the same wonderful feeling is not experienced twice, only once and for all. Endless nights of Skype conversations, all our lives were recorded in this video sharing program, where we talked, shared our days, ate, fell asleep, and even quarreled.�
After half a year of separation, I went to visit her in Finland, where we planned everything for our vacation together. We went contentedly together around the clock ,and parted for no more than ten minutes. It's a great feeling, you and her and her classmate �from the next room, a funny student from Albania who treated us to Albanian vodka, we woke up together in the dorm where she lived, in the town of Lappeenranta which is neatly located in the middle of the Finnish forest. There is silence around, you can whisper “I love you”to each other… Then from there we flew to the beautiful northern capital of Stockholm, and there were those most beautiful days from which I had a fabulous impression. When we spent time together, we always made concessions, not always in a peaceful way, but still in them lies all the magic of those relationships that always light up the soul.�
There were often serious disagreements between us, about our priorities, more precisely about her, more and more often she was dominated by the desire to stay there and continue her studies, science became my rival and there were more prospects for her, as I now understand. At the end of such dilemmas, we always came to the same conclusion, and she accepted my offer that she would return home after graduation, where we would get married and start a new life. Times passed, relations with them changed, despite all the difficulties I visited her, but already in Istanbul, London, we flew to Ireland together, and the closer the days approached the end of her studies, the more our relationship grew cold. Both of them were to blame, and I did not quite adequately accept certain unpleasant relations that developed between us during this period.�
It was July, the month when you need to return, and she flew in. We met on the day before my birthday, it was a sunny and then overcast day that finally turned into a downpour, it was the rain that tried to wash away my shock… She admitted that she signed a contract for an even longer period of training and then left in an unknown direction. After that, I saw her a few more times, and we talked once and then broke up for good.�
Another funny thing, for all the time I saw her in a dream twice, the first time when we broke up, we quarreled that foreshadowed trouble, and my second dream was yesterday, in it we had sex)) I don't understand what this is about, but I hope it's for the best. This is my love story.. it didn't work out!
Freedom is an opportunity for action, and control (self – control) is a complex evolutionary mechanism, essentially a strategy that a person chooses (or even develops) for himself. The longer the chain of meaningful actions, the more developed is the living being that performs them. Unlike animals, humans can think in multiple ways. A complex system of self-control is essential here. On the other hand, freedom also characterizes the level of development. Creatures less advanced than humans have much less freedom of choice. A complex chain of actions cannot be planned without sufficient freedom. But if you squander your huge opportunities without any strategy, they will naturally decrease.
My answer is that both conditions are equally important for a person, since they are interdependent on each other.
For starters, a person can be controlled by someone, and so can a person control himself. And freedom is different, and this does not mean that feeling free, a person will remain a person.
I believe that what makes a person a person is their freedom of choice and their self-control. I still give the advantage to freedom of choice, because thanks to this, a person knows how to control himself and how to interact with society, while remaining a person. And this does not mean that he will submit against his will to the control imposed from outside.
Under someone's control, you can make a “convenient person”, convenient for those who control it. Society attributes to a person its own moral norms, limits, and laws that a person must follow. Because it's so convenient to co-exist and interact. Of course, it is more convenient when the person is obedient. But will a person who does not know how to think independently remain a person? Will he remain human when the society in which he lives is far from humane? Does he want to think about the fact that this society and this control only harms and worsens everyone's life, except, of course, the lives of those who control it all? A person under control will think as they are imposed and forced to. Therefore, under the control of the person will remain a puppet.
What can you see when a person is given complete freedom in all senses? Here his further actions will be determined by his freedom of choice. Perhaps, if all people were given freedom, chaos would begin in the world, because, I think, not many people would think about “remaining human” and acting like a human being, when everything is allowed to them and they will not be punished for all their actions. But so far there is no exact answer to this question of mine, because now no one has yet been given a chance to check it, so my opinion here is subjective.
But we are looking at the individual, not the whole of humanity. Humanity, in my opinion, cannot exist without control. But only a person can choose whether to follow him blindly, or to think independently and act as he sees fit.
Freedom, I think, in the sense that the existentialists meant it. This is voluntary and responsible responsibility for your actions and awareness of the possible consequences of each action. If we turn to Vladimir Solovyov, then, in his opinion, the path to freedom lies through self-limitation of our material nature, self-control, through which our spiritual potential is revealed.
Freedom, namely the ability to choose your own goals independently, makes a person a person and not a pathetic tool of other people's ambitions.�
Control, namely the non-instinctive ability to resist certain desires in order to achieve even greater emotional benefits, makes a person a person, and not an animal. The ability of a human to get up every morning and run five kilometers is impossible for an animal, as well as the desire of a human to sacrifice his life against the instincts that demand the opposite.
In general, a person is a being who is able to independently determine his own desires and consciously set priorities between them.
Neither one nor the other.
If figuratively, then:
You can keep a dog on a chain, and it will not become a person (although it will be under control).
You can release a dog into the forest, and it again will not become a person (regardless of freedom).
What makes a man human is something that animals don't have. Freedom, control, and even love are found in animals. But mercy and critical thinking do not meet.
Or maybe that's not the point at all 🙂