Scribd
Upload
65 views1 page

Positive and Negative Liberty

Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty propose 'situated freedom,' emphasizing that choices are influenced by social and historical contexts, while Beauvoir highlights how institutions limit choices for women and oppressed groups. The document contrasts positive liberty, which is the capacity to act on one's free will, with negative liberty, which is freedom from external interference. Additionally, it discusses the political implications of these concepts, noting that interpretations of liberty can lead to differing views on the role of the state in individual self-realization.

Uploaded by

MsDonna Arellano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
65 views1 page

Positive and Negative Liberty

Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty propose 'situated freedom,' emphasizing that choices are influenced by social and historical contexts, while Beauvoir highlights how institutions limit choices for women and oppressed groups. The document contrasts positive liberty, which is the capacity to act on one's free will, with negative liberty, which is freedom from external interference. Additionally, it discusses the political implications of these concepts, noting that interpretations of liberty can lead to differing views on the role of the state in individual self-realization.

Uploaded by

MsDonna Arellano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Both Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty work towards a notion of ‘situated freedom’ according to

which choice is always embedded in and dependent upon the meaningful choices disclosed by
a specific social and historical situation. Beauvoir tries to show how institutions and social
practices can cut off the choices open to women and oppressed groups. Finally, Nietzsche calls
attention to the way biological and historical factors operate ‘behind our backs,’ influencing our
decisions without our awareness. But even when such limitations are recognized, the belief that
we can rise above our situations to be ‘creators’ remains fundamental to existentialist thought.

Positive liberty is the possession of the capacity to act upon one's free will, as opposed
to negative liberty, which is freedom from external restraint on one's actions. A concept
of positive liberty may also include freedom from internal constraints.

Negative liberty is freedom from interference by other people. Negative liberty is primarily
concerned with freedom from external restraint and contrasts withpositive liberty (the
possession of the power and resources to fulfil one's own potential). ... XXI; thus alluding
to liberty in its negative sense).

Negative liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints. One has negative liberty
to the extent that actions are available to one in this negative sense. Positive liberty is the
possibility of acting — or the fact of acting — in such a way as to take control of one's life
and realize one's fundamental purposes. While negative liberty is usually attributed to
individual agents, positive liberty is sometimes attributed to collectivities, or to individuals
considered primarily as members of given collectivities.
The idea of distinguishing between a negative and a positive sense of the term ‘liberty’ goes
back at least to Kant, and was examined and defended in depth by Isaiah Berlin in the 1950s
and ’60s. Discussions about positive and negative liberty normally take place within the
context of political and social philosophy. They are distinct from, though sometimes related
to, philosophical discussions about free will. Work on the nature of positive liberty often
overlaps, however, with work on the nature of autonomy.
As Berlin showed, negative and positive liberty are not merely two distinct kinds of liberty;
they can be seen as rival, incompatible interpretations of a single political ideal. Since few
people claim to be against liberty, the way this term is interpreted and defined can have
important political implications. Political liberalism tends to presuppose a negative definition
of liberty: liberals generally claim that if one favors individual liberty one should place
strong limitations on the activities of the state. Critics of liberalism often contest this
implication by contesting the negative definition of liberty: they argue that the pursuit of
liberty understood as self-realization or as self-determination (whether of the individual or of
the collectivity) can require state intervention of a kind not normally allowed by liberals.

You might also like