Moral and Personal Positive Freedom

2021 ◽  
pp. 45-64
Author(s):  
Maria Dimova-Cookson
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Andrew T. Kenyon

This chapter explores the positive structural dimensions of the freedom of speech by using a democratic free speech rationale. While far from the only aspect of positive free speech, it offers a useful example of the freedom’s positive dimensions. The chapter focuses on legal conditions underlying public speech and their links to democratic constitutional arrangements. It outlines the general approach before drawing brief comparisons with two well-known US approaches to free speech and media freedom. The chapter then highlights two of the multiple ways in which ‘positive’ can be used in relation to free speech. Positive may concern positive freedom, the idea that freedom is not only a negative liberty but requires support or enablement. It can also be used in terms of a positive right, typically a legal right enforced through courts.


2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Göksel Yıkmış

In this article, I will explore the issue of whether it is coherent to say that one person has more freedom than another by considering negative and positive freedom traditions. First, I will briefly describe the notion of negative and positive freedom. Second, I will begin to make a connection between notions of liberty and one agent having more freedom than another. Third, I will outline the inadequacy of the negative tradition, and then I will discuss the necessity of positive tradition. It is concluded that some notion of positive liberty is needed to make coherent sense of the claim that persons can vary in degree of liberty. However, owing to social contract issues, I conclude that both conceptions are needed. Bu çalışmada, bir kişinin diğerinden daha fazla özgürlüğe sahip olduğunu söylemenin tutarlı olup olmadığı, felsefedeki negatif ve pozitif özgürlük kavramları ele alınarak incelenmiştir. Bu bağlamda ilk olarak negatif ve pozitif özgürlük kavramları kısaca açıklanmıştır. Ardından, özgürlük kavramları ile bir kişinin diğerinden daha fazla özgürlüğe sahip olması arasında bir bağlantı kurulmuştur. Son olarak, felsefedeki negatif özgürlük kavramının neden yetersiz olduğunun ana hatları çizilmiş ve ardından pozitif geleneğin gerekliliği ele alınıp tartışılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, kişilerin özgürlük ve bağımsızlık derecesine göre çeşitlilik gösterebileceği iddiasını tutarlı bir şekilde anlamlandırmak için pozitif özgürlük kavramına ihtiyaç olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Bununla birlikte bu çalışmada, toplum sözleşmesi kavramında yer alan birtakım sorunlar nedeniyle, her iki özgürlük kavramın da özgürlük düşüncesi için gerekli olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. <p> </p><p><strong> Article visualizations:</strong></p><p><img src="/-counters-/edu_01/0630/a.php" alt="Hit counter" /></p>


Author(s):  
Rita Dirks

In Miriam Toews’s A Complicated Kindness (2004; Giller Prize finalist; winner of Canada's Governor General's Award) Nomi Nickel, a sixteen-year-old Mennonite girl from southern Manitoba, Canada, tells the story of her short life before her excommunication from the closed community of the fictional East Village. East Village is based on a real town in southern Manitoba called Steinbach (where Toews was born), where Mennonite culture remains segregated from the rest of the world to protect its distinctive Anabaptist Protestantism and to keep its language, Mennonite Low German or Plattdeutsch, a living language, one which is both linguistically demotic yet ethnically hieratic because of its role in Mennonite faith. Since the Reformation, and more precisely the work of Menno Simons after whom this ethno-religious group was christened, Mennonites have used their particular brand of Low German to separate themselves from the rest of humankind. Toews constructs her novel as a multilingual narrative, to represent the cultural and religious tensions within. Set in the early 1980s, A Complicated Kindness details the events that lead up to Nomi’s excommunication, or shunning; Nomi’s exclusion is partly due to her embracing of the “English” culture through popular, mostly 1970s, music and books such as J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. Insofar as Toews’s novel presents the conflict between the teenaged narrator and the patriarchal, conservative Mennonite culture, the books stands at the crossroads of negative and positive freedom. Put succinctly, since the beginnings of the Protestant Reformation, Mennonites have sought negative freedom, or freedom from persecution, yet its own tenets foreclose on the positive freedom of its individual members. This problem reaches its most intense expression in contemporary Mennonitism, both in Canada and in the EU, for Mennonite culture returns constantly to its founding precepts, even through the passage of time, coupled with diasporic history. Toews presents this conflict between this early modern religious subculture and postmodern liberal democracy through the eyes of a sarcastic, satirical Nomi, who, in this Bildungsroman, must solve the dialectic of her very identity: literally, the negative freedom of No Me or positive freedom of Know Me. As Mennonite writing in Canada is a relatively new phenomenon, about 50 years old, the question for those who call themselves Mennonite writers arises in terms of deciding between new, migrant, separate-group writing and writing as English-speaking Canadians.


2017 ◽  
pp. 367-379
Author(s):  
David West
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Allyn Fives

Even when parents exercise their power in a paternalistic fashion so as to make up for children’s deficits, parents can be faced with moral dilemmas, conflicts which call into question the legitimacy of parents’ exercise of power even in these instances. This is the case, I shall argue in this chapter, because a number of different moral considerations are relevant when we consider children’s agency, and they can pull in different directions and make incompatible demands when we evaluate parents’ power. In particular, we address the following question: how do we evaluate situations where, while promoting children’s positive freedom, parents violate the rights that protect children’s negative freedom?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document