I read, listen - and most remembered someone mourning: so much talk about freedom and so little free people. It seems that the "freedom to meet us at the door happily," and all will be happy because, as noted by Ernest Hemingway: "The bull in the arena, too neurotic. A meadow he a big guy ... "And in response S. Kierkegaard:" People do not enjoy the freedom that they have, but they require that, where they do not have. "
There are three definitions that make up what I call the triangle of freedom.
The first is "perceived need" (Marx). But not forced, Forcing something or someone, and the need for internal - something without which I can not be myself. External necessity can be internal, and can not be. It can create a force pushing to help emerge, when it is pressed to the bottom of unfreedom. But she - not freedom.
The second belongs to F. Niringu: "the ability to be and to become." It is also not a purely external. Quite often we see examples of how to use all the opportunities provided by the life of people and could not be and become. This facet of freedom is born and exists in the external and internal dialogue.
The third belongs to M. Mamardashvili: "... this is what rests in the freedom of the other, and this is my last condition." Freedom infringes upon the freedom of another, perestaet be free and fall into slavery power over another, possession, satisfaction in itself unconscious ... If summarize, freedom - and be aware of the need to get them, at least not an obstacle but as a maximum - contributing to the implementation of the same need another person. In this understanding of freedom - a thing always probabilistic, not causal, and the individual, and not general. And indeed, as Vladimir Ilyich wrote: "The reason is not at all the reason, as long as it does not work." Slipping on spilled oil Annushka - not necessarily fall off, especially under the tram, all the more so that he snapped his head.
Hence, by definition, taking responsibility for the ambiguity of the results. This does not prevent forecasting the consequences of their actions and the risk weighting of exposures. I would even say that the responsibility just assumes require them and at the same time takes insecurity results. Scratched his head in front of a stone at the crossroads and go right, I take responsibility for how and what I will be doing in this way, and for what, avoid unpleasant and dangerous path to the left, I do not get the good things that nem there is. Freedom always puts the choice, and the rejection of choice - a choice too. Is it because the freedom suddenly begins to seem excessive load? Where as it is easier to live in an orderly flow, do not fool yourself head elections - let stream carries. The internal lack of freedom liberates from taking personal, internal, psychological liability by blocking the possibility of such a decision, but it is not exempt from the responsibility for the results. Neurotic fear of frogs does not relieve the person who knows how to swim from responsibility and remorse for what he had for fear perched on the shore of frogs did not try to save a drowning. The degree of freedom and acceptance of responsibility on the substance and form the main measure of the condition and psychological well-being. If dancing virhovskogo from certain diseases - "Bound Life in its freedom", the man comes to me, when I feel lonely in the face of this constraint, of which wants to be free and choose to do so. And together we unravel the hundreds of threads, which his hands and feet entangled, like Gulliver's Lilliputians, his life.