It is freedom if you accept it. Your will can become free even your situation is determined. I am free to fulfill my potential to the point that my situation allows for it to be fulfilled, but if I decide not to fulfill it, that will further hinder my progress towards actualization. Hence, I am free to do whatever I am able to do within any given situation, but a situation always exists.

It is freedom if you accept it. Your will can become free even your situation is determined.

I also agree with this, but it happens that I cannot in last final instance, call that freedom...

..pardon me my enthusiastic language, but the bloody "Thing

If I accept being forced at the point of a gun to hand over my wallet to a mugger, then I freely hand over my wallet? Nah!

Time as measured with calenders and clocks is clearly a human invention. The temporal sequencing of events is fundamental to casual reality.
Time and temporality are different conceptions.

If I accept being forced at the point of a gun to hand over my wallet to a mugger, then I freely hand over my wallet? Nah!

There are people that freely accept all that happens to them as they see it as a necessary condition of their being. It may be hard to conceive, but seem people are always satisfied with their lives.

But I feel humans have the unique ability to not allow their situation effect them. We have power over our will when no other animals do. If I freely accept my situation, and am truly content with it in all situations, then I would consider my self truly free.

This is an interesting point. Is causality not perhaps dependent upon the sequencing of events? I can't deny my practical faith in causality, but I still feel there's a logical gap. From my understanding, Kant presented causality as something transcendental. I personally think that causality, like time, is a byproduct of concept...that both are learned, albeit at a young age.
It does seem that sequencing is transcendental, but Einstein's relativity is something we can understand, and this shows a certain flexibility. So maybe even sequencing is learned.

But I feel humans have the unique ability to not allow their situation effect their will. We have power over our will when no other animals do. If I freely accept my situation, even though the situation is determined, and am truly content in all situations, then I would consider my self truly free. Even if it is only freedom from my specific standpoint.

That is basically Stoicism. Which incidentally is an admirable philosophy.

I may freely accept handing over my wallet at the point of a gun (whatever that means) but how does that mean that I have freely handed over my wallet at the point of a gun? Accepting being forced to do something does not convert it into not being forced to do that thing.

---------- Post added 05-12-2010 at 01:49 AM ----------



And could you have any other...of course you are right !
Nevertheless I think the word is dangerous, and a fake...people think of it differently !

That is basically Stoicism. Which incidentally is an admirable philosophy.

If I accept being forced at the point of a gun to hand over my wallet to a mugger, then I freely hand over my wallet? Nah! (I may be a knight of resignation, but that is a little over the top, don't you think?)

But freedom is not the acceptance of necessity, even if some philosophers (like Spinoza) preach it. After all, as Cicero remarked, "There is nothing so absurd that some philosopher has not said it", (By the way, Cicero was a stoic). The notion that freedom is the acceptance of necessity is exactly the same attitude evinced by that fox who, after trying to get at the grapes and falling to do so, reconciled himself to failure by telling himself that he didn't want the grapes anyway. La Fontaine's fable is where the phrase, "sour grapes" comes from. I don't know that sour grapes is an admirable philosophy.

What is admirable is what is most functional. I believe it is most functional to freely accept the circumstances you've been given, and I am thankful for the ability to brace myself from the wrath of my circumstance.

Is it more admirable to blindly go into all situations with the same expectations?

Actualization is dependent upon, what it would seem, both me and the world. But since I exist in the world, the actualization of the event does just happen, so in that since you may have a point. It comes down to how much you consider a person's will to be within is control. I like to believe my will is autonomous, but I guess there is no definite answer.

I guess it all comes down to the viewpoint you are viewing it from. From my viewpoint I am free, but from a universal viewpoint, I am determined. We are just seldom given the ability of hindsight prior to the act.

Well sure. If you cannot do anything about it, the most "functional" thing to do may be to accept it. But that does not mean that what it is you are accepting that you do not want to do, mysteriously converts into being something you want to do simply by your acceptance of it. You are still being forced to do it, even if you accept being forced to do it. Just because you accept that you can do no other doesn't mean that you should think that you can do other. That is not admirable. That is self-deception. Even the fox didn't do that. And he was only a fox, after all.