UNIT 2: LIBERTY AS SELF DETERMINATION*

Question 1

2.2 VIEWS OF J .S MILL, T. H GREEN ON LIBERTY

Answer 1

Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)

J.S. Mill:

Negative Liberty: Freedom from state interference, self-determination.

Positive Liberty: State’s role in boosting individual potential and self-development.

Sovereignty of the Individual: Over one’s body and mind.

Self-regarding vs Other-regarding actions: Personal vs societal concerns.

T.H. Green:

Positive Liberty: State’s role in creating conditions for moral freedom.

Moral Freedom: State enables self-determined actions through social conditions.

L.T. Hobhouse & Harold Laski:

Positive Liberty: State’s intervention to ensure individual welfare.

Economic Redistribution: State’s responsibility to limit privileged economic rights.

Mnemonic (Initials):
“M G L”

M: Mill (Negative, Positive liberty, Sovereignty)

G: Green (Positive liberty, Moral freedom)

L: Laski & Hobhouse (Welfare, Economic redistribution)

Answer

Introduction

The concepts of liberty and individual freedom are central to political philosophy. Thinkers like J.S. Mill and T.H. Green have shaped these ideas significantly. While Mill offered a distinction between negative and positive liberty, T.H. Green further developed the positive liberty concept, focusing on the state’s role in facilitating moral freedom.

Body

1. J.S. Mill: Liberty and Individual Sovereignty

Negative Liberty:

Mill emphasizes that individuals should be free from interference by the state except in cases of self-defense.

In personal matters (self-regarding actions), individuals should have the absolute freedom to make decisions concerning their own lives, bodies, and minds.

Positive Liberty:

Mill also acknowledges that the state’s interference can sometimes be beneficial for individual self-development.

The state should enable individuals to reach their fullest potential by facilitating freedom that enhances creativity and rational self-determination.

Self-regarding vs Other-regarding Actions:

Self-regarding actions concern only the individual and do not affect others, giving the individual sovereignty over those choices.

Other-regarding actions involve others and may warrant state intervention to protect the rights of others in society.

2. T.H. Green: Positive Liberty and Moral Freedom

Moral Freedom:

T.H. Green builds on Mill’s positive liberty by arguing that true freedom is not just the absence of interference, but the empowerment of individuals to make moral choices.

The state must play an active role in ensuring social conditions that allow individuals to exercise their moral freedom.

State’s Positive Role:

Green believes that individuals can only achieve true freedom when the state helps create an environment where people are not limited by external constraints such as poverty or lack of resources.

For example, a person should be able to help others (like taking a wounded person to the hospital) without fear of legal repercussions, which highlights a need for state protection and support.

3. L.T. Hobhouse & Harold Laski: Positive Liberty and Welfare

State and Welfare:

Thinkers like Hobhouse and Laski further elaborate on positive liberty by emphasizing the state’s role in securing the welfare of its citizens.

They argue that individuals can only truly self-determine their actions when their basic needs are met, which may require state intervention and even limiting the economic rights of the privileged few.

Economic Redistribution:

This view suggests that the state has a responsibility to ensure fairness in the distribution of wealth to allow everyone equal opportunity for self-realization.

Conclusion

Both J.S. Mill and T.H. Green contributed significantly to the understanding of liberty. While Mill highlighted the importance of individual sovereignty and the balance between negative and positive liberty, T.H. Green expanded on the positive liberty concept, stressing the state’s role in enabling moral freedom. Thinkers like Hobhouse and Laski further supported this notion, advocating for welfare policies to ensure individual freedom through economic equity.

Question 2

2.3 ISAIAH BERLIN’S TWO CONCEPTS OF LIBERTY

Answer 2

Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)

Isaiah Berlin:

Negative Liberty: Freedom from interference (freedom from “what” or “whom”).

Positive Liberty: Self-mastery and rational control of life (freedom to control one’s own actions).

Self-Determination: Individual’s will and ability to develop capacities.

Natural Limitations: Examples like flying or swimming (not a matter of political liberty).

Material Needs: State’s role in ensuring basic necessities.

Norman P. Barry:

Higher vs Lower Self: Rational vs irrational desires.

Self-Mastery: Controlling the lower self for true freedom.

Answer

Introduction

In his influential work “Two Concepts of Liberty” (1958), Isaiah Berlin discusses two distinct concepts of liberty: negative and positive liberty. These concepts have become central to understanding the nature of individual freedom in modern political thought. Berlin emphasizes that while negative liberty focuses on freedom from interference, positive liberty is concerned with self-mastery and self-determination. This distinction has led to further debates, including critiques about the state’s role in fulfilling basic material needs.

Body

1. Negative Liberty:

Freedom from Interference:

Berlin defines negative liberty as the freedom from external interference or coercion, meaning that an individual is free as long as there is no one or nothing stopping them from pursuing their own interests.

This type of liberty emphasizes freedom from “what” or “whom”, where an individual is in control of their actions without external obstacles.

Self-Determination:

In the context of negative liberty, individuals are the best judges of their own interests, and they have the right to pursue their goals without interference from the state or others.

For example, the state cannot prevent a person from pursuing a career or personal goal unless it directly affects the rights of others.

2. Positive Liberty:

Self-Mastery:

Positive liberty, on the other hand, is defined as the ability to self-determine and rationally control one’s life. It focuses on individual empowerment—an individual is free when they have the ability to control their actions and make decisions in accordance with their rational will.

This concept emphasizes self-mastery rather than mere absence of external interference. For instance, if a person wants to improve their health by quitting smoking, the state has no role to enforce such decisions. The individual must exert self-control to achieve their goal.

Limitations and Critique:

Berlin gives examples to clarify positive liberty. He argues that not being able to fly like an eagle or swim like a whale does not constitute a deprivation of political liberty because these are natural limitations beyond political control.

However, Berlin’s interpretation of positive liberty has been critiqued in the material sphere. Critics argue that if people lack basic necessities (e.g., food or healthcare), then the state has a moral duty to ensure access to these needs, thus supporting positive liberty in practical terms.

3. Norman P. Barry’s Contribution:

Higher and Lower Self:

Philosopher Norman P. Barry, in his analysis of Berlin’s work, introduced the idea of the higher self and lower self. According to Barry, the higher self represents rational desires—those focused on being moral, punctual, and clean, while the lower self includes irrational desires like addiction or violence.

Self-Mastery and Liberty:

Barry suggests that true freedom lies in self-mastery—the ability to control one’s lower self and achieve rational goals. Only when an individual can control these irrational impulses can they truly enjoy liberty.

Conclusion

Isaiah Berlin’s distinction between negative and positive liberty offers crucial insights into the nature of individual freedom. While negative liberty emphasizes the absence of interference, positive liberty focuses on self-mastery and the capacity to rationally control one’s life. Berlin’s views have sparked debates, particularly regarding the role of the state in ensuring material necessities for citizens, with critics arguing that positive liberty also requires state intervention in ensuring basic welfare. Norman P. Barry further develops Berlin’s ideas by introducing the concept of self-mastery as a prerequisite for true freedom.

Question 3

2.4 NEO-LIBERAL VIEW

Answer 3

Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)

Neo-Liberalism:

Proponents: Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan.

Objective: Economic growth, reduced government intervention, market-driven society.

Key Figures: Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Robert Nozick.

Minimum Government: Core principle of neo-liberalism.

Friedrich Hayek:

Liberty: Freedom from coercion, not necessarily political freedom.

State’s Role: Limit coercion, no distributive justice.

Liberty vs Equality: They are contradictory; freedom is more important than equality.

Milton Friedman:

Capitalism and Freedom: Emphasizes self-determination, minimal state intervention, supports market mechanisms.

No Equality: Equality impedes individual liberty.

Robert Nozick:

Limited State: Only protect property rights, no redistribution.

Entitlement Theory: Individual rights to goods based on self-application or natural resources.

State Role: Protect liberty, not correct inequalities in distribution.

Answer

Introduction

Neo-liberalism, emerging in the 1970s, revived economic liberalism and emphasized a reduced role of the government in favor of a market-driven society. Prominent proponents like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan aimed to reduce the fiscal deficit and boost economic growth by promoting free market principles. Key thinkers like Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, and Robert Nozick contributed to neo-liberal thought, arguing for minimal state intervention and prioritizing individual liberty.

Body

1. Friedrich Hayek:

Liberty as Freedom from Coercion:

In his work Constitution of Liberty, Hayek defines liberty as the freedom from coercion by the arbitrary will of others. He contends that true individual freedom is not political or internal freedom, nor is it the freedom of power.

Political vs. Individual Freedom:

Hayek asserts that political freedom, such as the ability to choose governments and participate in legislation, does not automatically guarantee individual freedom. For example, even a democratic government may impose restrictions, while an autocratic regime could offer more freedom in certain circumstances.

Liberty and Equality:

Hayek argues that liberty and equality are antithetical. He believes that state-driven attempts to enforce equality disrupt liberty by coercing individuals to conform to artificial standards. He contends that freedom is more important than equality, and it’s preferable for some people to have full freedom than for all to have limited freedom.

State Role:

Hayek advocates for minimal state intervention, asserting that the state should promote competition and ensure basic income but avoid enforcing social equality.

2. Milton Friedman:

Capitalism and Freedom:

In his seminal work, Friedman links capitalism with freedom, arguing that a capitalist society provides the necessary conditions for individuals to determine their own actions and thoughts.

State’s Role:

Friedman supports a minimal state, which should only intervene in areas that the market cannot handle effectively, such as national defense or law enforcement.

Equality:

Like Hayek, Friedman rejects the notion of equality as it impedes individual freedom. He contends that individual liberty should not be sacrificed for the sake of equality.

3. Robert Nozick:

Anarchy, State, and Utopia:

Nozick presents a view of a minimal state that protects property rights but avoids redistributing wealth or correcting inequalities.

Entitlement Theory:

Nozick argues that individuals have the right to their goods based on three sources: their own efforts (bodies, minds), natural resources (e.g., land, minerals), and the productive application of natural resources. Goods acquired through these means are considered justly owned unless voluntarily transferred.

State’s Role:

The state should function as a protective association, safeguarding individuals’ property rights but should not intervene in wealth distribution or enforce equality.

Conclusion

Neo-liberalism, as advanced by thinkers like Hayek, Friedman, and Nozick, promotes a system where the state’s role is limited, and the market drives the economy. They argue for individual liberty, emphasizing freedom from state interference and rejecting the pursuit of equality as it constrains freedom. In this framework, the state’s primary function is to protect property rights and maintain law and order, leaving other aspects of life to individual initiative and market forces.

Question 4

2.5 MARXIST CONCEPTION OF FREEDOM

Question 5

2.6 JOHN RAWLS’ CONCEPTION OF FREEDOM

Answer 5

Efficient Pointer Summary (Keywords)

John Rawls:

Key Work: A Theory of Justice

Theory: Procedural, deontological, and social liberal.

Main Principles:

1. Liberty: Maximum freedom is the first principle.
2. Equality of Opportunity: Equal access to resources and opportunities.
3. Difference Principle: Differential treatment for the disadvantaged.

Veil of Ignorance: Individuals are unaware of their position in society to determine fair principles.

Criticism:

Communitarianism (Michael Sandel): Critiques Rawls for treating individuals as atomized; stresses community ties over liberty.

Michael Walzer: Advocates for complex equality, different principles for different institutions.

Feminist Criticism: Argues Rawls ignores the private sphere, such as family, and would prioritize the Difference Principle.

Amartya Sen: Disagrees with absolute justice; advocates for practical justice over idealized theories.

Ronald Dworkin: Proposes the Auction Theory, where resources are distributed based on envy tests to achieve fairness.

Answer

Introduction

John Rawls’ theory of justice, as presented in A Theory of Justice, is a pivotal contribution to contemporary political philosophy. Rawls advocates for justice as fairness, with the central idea that a society can achieve freedom for its citizens only when structured according to principles of justice. His framework emphasizes procedural justice, where principles are determined in a fair manner through an imagined veil of ignorance, making him a proponent of positive liberalism.

Body

1. Rawls’ Principles of Justice:

Veil of Ignorance:

Rawls proposes that to determine the fairest principles of justice, individuals must be placed behind a veil of ignorance, where they are unaware of their personal circumstances (e.g., wealth, status, health). This helps ensure that the principles chosen will be fair and impartial.

The original position, analogous to the state of nature, is where individuals would rationally choose principles that maximize benefits for the least advantaged members of society.

Principles:

1. Maximum Liberty:

The first principle Rawls suggests is that freedom should be maximized. This ensures that every individual has the liberty to pursue their own plans and ambitions.

2. Equality of Opportunity:

Rawls stresses that all individuals must have equal access to opportunities and resources without discrimination or exploitation.

3. Difference Principle:

Rawls acknowledges that inequalities exist and must be managed in ways that benefit the least advantaged. The state should ensure protection and support for disadvantaged individuals, enabling them to achieve their potential.

2. Criticism:

Communitarianism (Michael Sandel):

Sandel critiques Rawls for assuming that individuals are isolated from their communities, advocating that individuals are inherently embedded in society. He suggests that equality of opportunity should be prioritized over maximum liberty.

Michael Walzer:

Walzer opposes Rawls’ universal standards for justice, instead advocating for complex equality—the idea that different social institutions (e.g., education, healthcare) have different principles of justice suited to their respective purposes.

Feminist Criticism:

Feminists argue that Rawls’ exclusion of the private sphere (e.g., family life) from his theory of justice overlooks crucial aspects of gender inequality. They assert that had women participated in the social contract, they would have prioritized the Difference Principle to address gender-based inequalities.

3. Alternative Views:

Amartya Sen:

Sen critiques Rawls for developing an absolute theory of justice, arguing that justice is relative and context-dependent. He stresses that rather than aiming for ideal justice, focus should be on reducing manifest injustices in real-world situations.

Ronald Dworkin:

Dworkin proposes the Auction Theory, where resources are distributed according to individuals’ desires and envy, with the goal of achieving fairness in a society. If individuals fail the envy test, the state should intervene with insurance to rectify inequalities.

Conclusion

Rawls’ Theory of Justice represents a groundbreaking approach to fairness, emphasizing liberty, equality of opportunity, and protection for the disadvantaged. However, it has faced significant critiques from communitarians, feminists, and economists like Amartya Sen, who argue for alternative views on justice that emphasize community, practical justice, and distributive fairness. The ongoing debate between Rawlsian theory and its critics reflects the complexity and evolving nature of the concept of justice in modern political philosophy.

Question 6

2.7 AMARTYA SEN’S CONCEPT OF LIBERTY

Question 7

2.8 FEMINIST CONCEPTION OF FREEDOM

Question 8

2.9 CONSERVATIVE VIEW OF LIBERTY

Answer 8

Efficient Pointer Summary

Conservatism: To conserve societal order and discipline.

Human Nature: Imperfect, security-seeking, dependent on social groups.

Tradition: Wisdom passed down, identity, cohesion.

Organic Society: Society as an interconnected organism.

Hierarchy & Authority: Natural, essential for societal order.

Property Rights: Earned, provide security, confidence.

Change: Change to conserve, avoid disorder.

Self-Determination: Achieved through order, duties, and responsibility.

Security & Protection: Stability needed for freedom.

Mnemonics

C - Conservatism
H - Human Nature
T - Tradition
O - Organic Society
H - Hierarchy & Authority
P - Property Rights
C - Change
S - Self-Determination
S - Security & Protection

Mnemonic: Christy Holds To Organic Harmony, Protecting Change, Supporting Security.

Answer:

Introduction

Conservatism is a philosophy rooted in the idea of maintaining order, tradition, and stability within society. It argues that true freedom, or self-determination, can only be achieved when there is discipline, respect for authority, and adherence to traditions. Human nature, according to conservatives, is imperfect and requires the structure provided by established institutions, hierarchy, and property rights to function optimally. The conservative view emphasizes the importance of a stable society for individuals to realize their freedom.

Body

1. Conservatism as “To Conserve”:

The essence of conservatism is to preserve societal order, traditional values, and established structures.

Order and discipline are seen as the bedrock of liberty and self-determination.

Society should conserve traditions that have stood the test of time as they embody the wisdom of past generations.

2. Human Nature in Conservatism:

Conservatives argue that humans are inherently imperfect, driven by security-seeking instincts.

Human beings cannot exist in isolation and are always part of social groups like families, communities, or workplaces.

Self-determination is achievable when individuals understand and fulfill their social obligations, not when they are detached from these responsibilities.

3. Role of Tradition:

Traditions, including values, practices, and institutions, are considered accumulated wisdom from the past.

These traditions provide a sense of identity, belonging, and security.

Traditions contribute to social cohesion, making them vital for a stable and orderly society.

Edmund Burke emphasized that society is a partnership between those living, dead, and those yet to be born.

4. Organic Society:

Conservatives view society as an organic organism, where each part is dependent on others for proper functioning.

Just as organs in a body work together, various classes and groups in society have different but interconnected roles.

The concept of an organic society reinforces the idea that freedom is about accepting duties and responsibilities to others, not just individual liberty.

5. Hierarchy and Authority:

Hierarchy and authority are natural and necessary for maintaining order in society.

Conservatives argue that inequality is not a flaw but a natural aspect of human society.

Just as different organs in a body have specialized functions, various societal roles (e.g., workers, employers) ensure stability and progression.

Authority is necessary to provide leadership, maintain discipline, and organize society effectively.

For instance, a sports coach guiding players is an example of authority guiding individuals to success.

6. Property Rights:

Property rights are fundamental to conservatism; property is earned through merit, hard work, and talent.

Owning property provides security, confidence, and a psychological sense of protection.

Property owners, in maintaining their wealth and possessions, contribute to order and discipline in society.

When property rights are respected, individuals naturally work to sustain social stability, as instability would directly affect their wealth.

7. Change and Tradition:

Conservatives are not opposed to change, but they believe change should conserve existing traditions and structures, ensuring stability.

Edmund Burke argued that while change is inevitable, it must be measured and must not disturb the core values and traditions of society.

Change must be gradual and respectful of what has been proven to work over time.

8. Security and Protection for Liberty:

Liberty and self-determination can only be realized in a secure and stable environment.

A disordered society undermines individual freedom, as even small freedoms are at risk in such instability.

Every individual naturally seeks protection and security to live a fulfilling life, which only a stable society can provide.

Conclusion

In conservatism, liberty and self-determination are inseparable from a well-ordered society. Tradition, hierarchy, authority, and the protection of property rights are all fundamental to preserving the conditions under which individuals can achieve true freedom. Change must be approached cautiously, respecting the accumulated wisdom of the past while maintaining societal stability. Ultimately, conservatism posits that security and stability are the cornerstones of liberty, as without them, true freedom becomes unattainable.

Question 9

2.10 POST-MODERN CONCEPT OF LIBERTY

Answer 9

Efficient Pointer Summary

Post-modernism & Liberty: Freedom through rejecting established knowledge.

Knowledge: Partial, local, and constructed to serve certain societal sections.

Truth: No universal truth, only socially constructed truths.

Hierarchy Rejection: Reject political, social, and intellectual hierarchies.

Anti-foundationalism: No universal moral or political principles.

Creation of Truth: Individuals and societies must create their own truths.

Philosophers:

Nietzsche: Nihilism, truth as fiction, self-made values.

Lyotard: Incredulity towards meta-narratives.

Foucault: Knowledge is power, truth as a social construct.

Derrida: Deconstruction, no fixed meanings, appreciation of difference.

Rorty: No objective standpoint, philosophy as conversation.

Mnemonics

P - Post-modernism & Liberty
K - Knowledge
T - Truth
H - Hierarchy Rejection
A - Anti-foundationalism
C - Creation of Truth
P - Nietzsche’s Principles
L - Lyotard’s Legacy
F - Foucault’s Focus
D - Derrida’s Deconstruction
R - Rorty’s Rejection of objective standpoint

Mnemonic: Progressive Knowledge Turns Hierarchical Assumptions Chartered by Philosophers: Lyotard, Foucault, Derrida, and Rorty.

Answer:

Introduction

Post-modernists conceptualize liberty in a radically different way, emphasizing the individual’s ability to reject established systems of knowledge and assert their own truths. According to post-modern thought, freedom is realized when individuals discard universal truths and embrace the local and partial truths that shape their own experiences. Rejecting both intellectual and societal hierarchies is key to this self-determination, where each person can create their own path to freedom.

Body

1. Post-modernism’s Core Concept:

Post-modernism believes liberty is achieved through rejecting the established systems of knowledge and information.

Individuals must be free to assert their own knowledge, unbound by external truths imposed by societal powers.

Knowledge, for post-modernists, is partial and local, meaning it is shaped by the experiences and perspectives of each society.

Universal truths are considered a form of arrogance, as they ignore the variety of truths across different cultures and contexts.

2. The Role of Knowledge:

Knowledge is not objective or universal; it is constructed to support the interests of the dominant sections of society.

These dominant powers control what is recognized as truth, ensuring that it favors their interests and maintains their position of authority.

Post-modernists argue for a more inclusive approach, where different truths are given equal weight and legitimacy.

3. Rejection of Hierarchies:

Post-modernists reject all forms of hierarchies, including those in knowledge systems, politics, and society.

They believe that hierarchical structures limit individual freedom by imposing restrictive views on what is considered valid or true.

The rejection of hierarchy is crucial for liberty, as it allows individuals to freely question and explore alternative ideas and beliefs.

4. Anti-foundationalism:

Post-modernism is fundamentally anti-foundationalist, rejecting the idea of universal moral or political principles.

There are no absolute truths or systems from which all beliefs must be judged; rather, each society or individual constructs their own values and understandings.

The concept of universal truth is seen as oppressive, as it suppresses diversity and personal freedom.

5. Creation of Truth:

According to post-modernists, freedom is realized when individuals and societies create their own truths.

By rejecting external truths, individuals are empowered to engage with the world on their own terms, allowing for self-determination.

The process of creating truth involves continuous questioning, deconstruction, and dialogue to explore the complexities of human experience.

6. Post-modern Philosophers:

Friedrich Nietzsche: Advocated for nihilism, rejecting all moral and political principles, viewing truth as fiction. He believed that individuals must create their own values and worldviews.

Jean-François Lyotard: Defined post-modernity as incredulity towards meta-narratives, skeptical of all ideologies and grand stories. He suggested that no single story can explain the complexities of human experience.

Michel Foucault: Argued that knowledge is power. He believed that truth is socially constructed and that those in power control the dominant knowledge systems to perpetuate their own interests.

Jacques Derrida: Advocated for deconstruction, the practice of questioning and exposing the contradictions in texts and ideas. He argued that meanings are not fixed, but are always evolving.

Richard Rorty: Stated that there is no objective standpoint from which beliefs can be judged. He viewed philosophy as an ongoing conversation, without final or universal answers.

7. The Importance of Discourse and Debate:

Post-modernists believe that discourse and debate are essential for uncovering different truths within societies.

By engaging in constant dialogue, individuals can challenge the dominant narratives and construct more diverse and inclusive truths.

The focus is on understanding differences, rather than imposing a single universal perspective.

Conclusion

Post-modernists propose a revolutionary concept of liberty where freedom is attained through the rejection of universally accepted truths and systems of knowledge. They argue that individuals and societies should create their own truths, free from the influence of dominant powers. The ideas of key philosophers like Nietzsche, Lyotard, Foucault, Derrida, and Rorty contribute to the belief that truths are fluid, constructed, and should be constantly questioned and redefined. By rejecting hierarchies and embracing self-determination, post-modernism paves the way for a more inclusive and dynamic conception of freedom.