Abstract
This essay analyses Rousseau’s view of freedom while providing a linkage between this particular conception of freedom and the distinction between positive and negative freedom as advanced by Isaiah Berlin. The strengths and weaknesses of Rousseau’s view of freedom are then critically analyzed. Negative freedom is the total absence of barriers, constraints and obstacles. Berlin argued that negative freedom is usually directed towards individuals. He stated a person is not a slave of the other and everyone has the liberty to do what they wishes to do. The law or even social pressure does not prevent individuals from undertaking the actions they wish to undertake. Rousseau asserts that man is blessed with totality of freedom. He provides two reasons as to why man should enjoy total freedom; first, man should be spiritually and psychologically free because he is not under the chains of any kind of artificial needs that characterize the modern society
Berlin’s Categories of Freedom
In his rather influential essay, Isaiah Berlin analyzed freedom, where he distinguished between positive and negative freedom. These are two rival concepts in freedom. Often, they are taken as the difference between ‘free from something’ and ‘free do so something’.
Negative Freedom
According to Berlin, negative freedom is the total absence of barriers, constraints and obstacles. Negative freedom is usually directed towards individuals (Schelling 39). In other words, negative freedom denotes the extent to which the society one lives in does not stop that particular individual from doing some certain things. No person is a slave of the other and each one has the liberty to do what he or she wishes to do. The law or even social pressure does not prevent individuals from undertaking the actions they wish to undertake. It is very important to understand that the negative form of freedom leaves one to do whatever he wishes to do regardless of the perceived consequences. Disadvantage, disease, and poverty are only regarded as a misfortune and from the stand point of negative freedom. They cannot be seen as obstacles or limits to freedom (Schelling 39). The ideological implication of this form of freedom is that those who implement freedom the negative sense are usually inclined to supporting the minimal state and always tend to act as sympathizers dormant capitalism.
The major strengths of this category of freedom are that; it advocates for a greater extend of freedom of choice in regard to the market place. It also encourages individual agents to assume a greater sense of responsibility over their own circumstances and lives. This category of freedom is criticized on the sense that it promotes a system of ‘survival for the fittest’, which harms the systems of equality in the nation. The effect of this is manifested in the inequality in terms of opportunity and social injustice. Similarly, negative freedom can highly legitimize greed and selfishness which in turn may grant the weaker ones in the society nothing more than just the freedom of having to starve due to lack of resources.
Positive Freedom
Positive freedom is the fact or the possibility of acting is a way that is geared towards taking control of one’s life and realizing the fundamental purposes of an individual. Positive freedom can be taken as state of self-mastery (Constant, p.114). It entails an individual having the role to choose the laws of the society in which he is made of. In other words, positive freedom underlines the extent to which an individual is able to choose the kind of rules and laws which govern the society one is living in. The positive freedom can be seen to result from the flaws which were witnessed in the negative form of freedom (Schelling 43). The advancement from the negative to the positive freedom was done so as to allow the liberals to remain true to the core principles and values of liberty. It is highly concerned with the opportunities which are available to individual agents so as to realize their full potential. The ultimate freedom is being free from any form of social evil that can easily blight the human existence. Interestingly, positive freedom recognizes that social disadvantage is a form of an enemy of freedom. In political systems, positive freedom can be thought of as being achieved through a system of collectivity and participation process.
The major strengths of this category of freedom are that it allows for economic intervention. Similarly, positive freedom to an extent aims at providing freedom which comes with equality in opportunities. The positive freedom is also criticized on the following grounds; it allows for the growth of a ‘nanny ‘form of a state, where individuals are deprived off the responsibility of taking care of their own situations and lives. In this case therefore, a sense of responsibility cannot be easily fostered.
Rousseau View of Freedom
Rousseau seems to address the issue of freedom more vividly than another problem in the political system. He asserts that man is blessed with totality of freedom. He provides two reasons as to why man should enjoy total freedom; first, man should be spiritually and psychologically free because he is not under the chains of any kind of artificial needs that characterize the modern society (Robinson 7). Secondly, man can obtain total freedom because he is not constrained or limited by a state in its repressive nature. Rousseau believed that any good government must place the freedom of citizens as its major objective (Robinson 7). He developed the concept of social contract, which manifests his attempts to imagine a given form of government that is committed and that affirms the freedom of its citizens while recognizing the fact that there are some constraints which are inherent the civil and modern society.
Rousseau acknowledges that as far as laws and poverty are present in the society, people can never achieve total freedom. He distinguished between some various forms of freedom. For instance, he identified the natural freedom, which abounds in the natural state. This kind of freedom provides man with the unlimited right and liberty to do anything which he is tempted to do, and which he is able to attain. Rousseau acknowledges that man easily gives up his social freedom in a bid to join social contracts. Civil freedom is also explained by Rousseau, which entails having the social security, security derived from the fact that individual rights are defended and protected by the community.
How He fits to the Freedom Categories
The moral liberty advanced by Rousseau can be seen as a form of positive freedom (Robinson 10). In this kind of freedom, an individual’s actions will conform to his or her true will. The moral liberty is therefore realized is one has wiled the laws surrounding his polity. For instance, this can be achieved through the general will. Rousseau recognizes that just as one person is able to undertake different roles in the society, then he can be granted district will which corresponds to the different interests and roles undertaken.
Rousseau addresses the issue of unnaturalness of inequality (Schaeffer, p.26). Inequality is one of the major weaknesses of the negative form of freedom. His basic argument on the topic of inequality is that human inequality is it is known today does not exist in the natural state. He adds that the only kind of natural inequality is the physical inequality which may exist among men in the state of nature.
Strengths and Weaknesses
The major strengths of this conception of freedom include: provision of equality, where all citizens are provided with the same kind of opportunities. Although the law is seen to act as a constraint and a limitation, the law is regarded as being universal and hence it fosters equality in the society. The law is also derived from all. This conception of freedom also encourages participation and collectivity in the society.
However, some of the weaknesses associated with this conception of freedom include; the civil and modern society is made up of laws and rules. Even if a man may seem not a servant to any man, he is surely a servant to the law. What is left for us to discern is whether the law may overcome any kind of threat to freedom which is presented by personal dependency.
Works Cited
Constant, B. ‘The Liberty of the Ancients and the Liberty of the Moderns’ in M. Rosen & J. Wolff (eds.), Political Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. Print
Robinson, Dave. Introducing Rousseau: A Graphic Guide. New York: Icon Books, 2015. Print
Schaeffer, Denise. Rousseau on Education, Freedom, and Judgment. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press, 2014. Print
Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von. Grounding of Positive Philosophy, The: The Berlin Lectures. New York: SUNY Press, 2012. Print
