Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay evolution of human beings
Quiz human evolution
Freedom in modern society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay evolution of human beings
Since the beginning of humanity, a large part of humankind’s focus was directed towards survival. A person’s primary function is to survive and reproduce. As society progresses the the more contemporary of what is expected today, success has become jointed with how an individual works with others and less on how much they achieve by themselves. Mencken wrote that “the average man does not want to be free. He simply wants to be safe.” In comparison to modern beliefs this notion is quite true. The average American may say they love freedom, but just what kind of freedom are they talking about? For the majority, what they mean is that they want a safe environment where people can do what they want within reason and not bring about harm or discomfort
Mencken’s observations are very relevant and it applies to contemporary society. It is necessary to identify what it means by being “free”. Does being free mean that one has choice of religion and type of government? The type of freedom mentioned previously do not apply to mankind if mankind is not safe and is risk for danger. It is human nature to choose safety over freedom as shown in various examples.
Throughout history, Americans have sought to spread the spirit of equality, which is believed to be the realization of true freedom. Before establishing this freedom, every American had only one question stuck in their head: What is freedom? Our country received it in the year of 1776 from the British through a series of difficulties and wars. African Americans defined it as an escape from slavery, while immigrants defined it as their acceptance into a new society. More yet, women of the women’s suffrage defined their freedom as their recognition into society and for their rights to be equal to that of every other man. These different perceptions of cultures/groups in America tied together to form an American view of freedom. Freedom is something that every American should be willing to do anything in order to maintain. We may have weapons of mass destruction, but when it comes to living in a peaceful, American lifestyle, our freedom is our greatest weapon.
freedom as long as one does not disturb others in their state of nature; in this
With freedom comes great responsibility. This saying has been heard by generations of kids and has been said by generations of parents. Unfortunately people today don?t seem to be responsible in certain things they do. You see things in media today that make you wonder when you draw the line on things you say and do. William Golding the author of Lord of The Flies conveys this thought in the story of the boys stuck on the island where they have complete freedom to do whatever they want to do. They no longer had adults to tell them what and how to do things. The story just proves that when people are irresponsible and freedom gets abused that very bad things can happen.
H. L. Mencken wrote “the average man does not want to be free. He simply wants to be safe.” I agree with this quote because of the deeper meaning it has behind it. In today’s society people do not seem to have ambitions or dreams that they want to pursue. A lot of people settle with a job that pays just enough to make a living or they do not go beyond their limits to get a higher education to be able to make more money. These people are overcome by fear. They are afraid to continue moving forward and taking risks.
Our nation seems as if it is in a constant battle between freedom and safety. Freedom and security are two integral parts that keep our nation running smoothly, yet they are often seen conflicting with one another. “Tragedies such as Pearl Harbor, 9/11 and the Boston Marathon bombings may invoke feelings of patriotism and a call for unity, but the nation also becomes divided, and vulnerable populations become targets,” (Wootton 1). “After each attack a different group or population would become targets. “The attack on Pearl Harbor notoriously lead to Japanese Americans being imprisoned in internment camps, the attacks on 9/11 sparked hate crimes against those who appeared to be Muslim or Middle Eastern,” (Wootton 1). Often times people wind up taking sides, whether it be for personal freedoms or for national security, and as a nation trying to recover from these disasters we should be leaning on each other for support. Due to these past events the government has launched a series of antiterrorist measures – from ethnic profiling to going through your personal e-mail (Begley 1). Although there are times when personal freedoms are sacrificed for the safety of others, under certain circumstances the government could be doing more harm than good.
These fears proved to be something that Americans needed to have dealt with but could not do all by themselves. As a result, America’s definition of freedom expanded to show the same concepts of positive freedom that were seen in the 30s and 40s. Throughout the Cold War Americans called for the government to “protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice” (Foner 789). Consequently, the positive freedoms from the depression that provided security against the domestic issues that filled the 1930s were expanded to cover domestic and international concerns during the
Man has always strived for the ultimate form of stability. The world that forged our ancestors was a dangerous place, rife with disease, sparse with food, stricken with environmental harshness, brimming with beasts. They wanted to live in a world where the power of fear was lessened, where they could live longer, where they were safe. The societies we live in today were created to ensure that base standard of safety that Mencken observes all men desire. Mencken, however, misunderstands full extent of safety the average man desires, and in doing so he rules freedom as a separate entity, when truly the nature of freedom and safety are more intertwined than one may think.
Throughout history, western philosophers have vigorously attempted to define the word freedom, to little avail. This is because the word carries so many meanings in many different contexts. The consequences of these philosophers’ claims are immense: as “free” people, we like to rely on the notion of freedom, yet our judicial system relentlessly fights to explain what we can and cannot do. For instance, is screaming “bomb!” on an airplane considered one of our “freedoms?” Martin Luther, in his “Preface to the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans” asserts that people are free when their actions naturally reflect laws and morality to the point that those laws are considered unnecessary. Immanuel Kant, in his “An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment?”, articulates a similar view: freedom for Kant is the ability to exercise one’s reasoning without limitation in a public sphere. A deeper reading of these two texts exposes that Kant’s and Luther’s interpretations of freedom are actually more similar than different. Indeed, they are mutually exclusive: one cannot coexist with the other and Kant’s views can even be read as a restating of Luther’s understandings.
A sense of freedom is something that, regardless of where we are and how we live, we can feel in innumerable ways and in diverse places. However, being constrained does not necessarily mean that we are imprisoned or enclosed by walls and fences. Likewise, we may feel overwhelmed, surrounded, trapped, even though we are in the most unrestricted places in the world. The question is, do we have the courage to fight to gain the freedom we desire? In the film One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, the director Milos Forman shows that even though some might say freedom just comes without doing anything, it takes courage to fight for freedom.
For decades, the world’s many governments have regarded safety as a high-ranked priority for their countries and their citizens, especially the American government. Though some high officials place freedom above safety, they realize that safety must be achieved before the average citizen approaches the concept of acquiring freedom. H.L. Mencken states that the average citizen will choose safety over freedom. The average citizen can be defined as a person who would rather put his safety before others even for the sake of his freedom; however, an extraordinary citizen will put his life on the line for others’ safety and freedom. As Alexander Hamilton said, “Safety from external danger is the most powerful director of […] national conduct. Even the ardent love of liberty will, after a time, give way to its dictates.” Hamilton says that when put against external dangers safety takes priority and the American citizens will accept certain limitations of freedoms for their safety. Also, Hamilton states that the love of freedom with eventually become surpassed by the need of safety. The average American citizen prefers safety above freedom; this is affirmed by the citizen’s desire to protect themselves by any means necessary against cultural, territorial, and terrorist threats.
Every human being should have the right to be, as Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, free from fear. However, society is faced with the harsh reality that not every human being is born under circumstances where they have a true freedom from fear. All over the world people face abusive and violent situations that cripple them with fear. Society strives to find liberty from these terrifying situations for all people. However, this idea of freedom from fear is not a new concept. For many centuries the human race has tried to find freedom from the fear of oppressive governments, war, and violence. While the subject of our fear may change from time to time the basic human goal has said the same: True freedom is found in living when the freedom from fear is obtained.
In answering this final question raised, the conclusion to the essay emerges. We have seen how difficult it is to simply define liberty as a single conception, but have discovered many properties that a statement of freedom must posses. In the question between the conflicts of freedom, where two persons individual freedoms create a zero-sum game, the idea of social freedom emerges, and the idea that it is possible for there to be restrictions on an individual's freedom that are morally desirable. To best, and most simply explain in what sense we want people to be free, a balance must be found between the extent to which society may restrict an individual's freedom, and vice versa. As can be seen by observing politics throughout the ages, it is finding this balance that has proven to be the most challenging aspect of the ongoing question of freedom.
“Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, we’re free at last,” are the first words I think of when I think about America’s gift to my generation. Martin Luther King, Jr., a civil rights activist, is one of many that represent America’s gift to my generation. Freedom, defined in the dictionary as the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint, is the basic principle behind what this country was founded on. It is the idea that all men are created equal and are born with the same fundamental rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Ironically, however, since the existence of this great nation has begun, freedom is something that, in essence, has never been “free,” as so many have
Modern day society is engrossed in a battle for protection of individual rights and freedoms from infringement by any person, be it the government or fellow citizens. Liberalism offers a solution to this by advocating for the protection of personal freedom. As a concept and ideology in political science, liberalism is a doctrine that defines the motivation and efforts made towards the protection of the aforementioned individual freedom. In the current society, the greatest feature of liberalism is the protection of individual liberty from intrusion or violation by a government. The activities of the government have, therefore, become the core point of focus. In liberalism, advocacy for personal freedom may translate to three ideal situations, based on the role that a government plays in a person’s life. These are no role, a limited role or a relatively large role. The three make up liberalism’s rule of thumb. (Van de Haar 1). Political theorists have