The subject is related to the ‘what is freedom’ question.
In my view, freedom would be characterized by indifference.
This is something I wrote a week ago for somewhere else, but it pertains to this topic as it underlies individuality.
[size=150]Freedom then:
It seems to me that a concept becomes clearer when it is exaggerated or pushed to an imagined extreme.
Then some of the ambiguities are minimized and the picture is refined.
In the case of freedom let us imagine its absolute state, if we can - if we cannot let us imagine it to its most extreme manifestation that we can.
What would characterize freedom?
First let us mention that freedom is like saying power or eternal or perfect. It would be another way of defining the same thing: an absolute, inert state of non-existence.
But this too needs clarifying so let us skip it, for now.
The first thing that would characterize freedom is independence; an absence of dependence.
In its absolute form an absence of dependence on anything, in its lesser states an absence of dependence on fewer and fewer things or others.
Right away we see that man cannot be born free or, perhaps, even attain freedom while being a product of something else.
When I am born I am born dependant on something and someone.
‘I Need’ means I depend on something and I then care about it and desire it and want it.
Heidegger, if I’m not mistaken, in ‘Being and Time’ characterizes consciousness as the state of care.
I care first and foremost about my self.
This is my primary and underlying care in any interaction.
I breath means the same, I desire the same; I love, I hate means I depend on something and am affected by it, I am conditioned by it and so I care about it.
Emotion is the brain’s conditioning to react a certain way to stimuli for the sake of its own welfare - genetic or otherwise.
This is why emotion has such a powerful inebriating affect on reason.
Both reason and emotion are concerned about existence but come about it from different perspectives.
The emotional mind thinks that truth should be beneficial to self and denies anything that contradicts self-interests.
The reasonable mind thinks that ‘truth’ should be known as clearly as possible so as to use it towards self-interest.
Automatically we see that freedom would be the opposite of this care, or characterized by indifference.
We begin to see now the connection between courage, confidence and power/indifference.
We see why it is so attractive to man. The truly confident man and the courageous man is the one that cares the least about the consequences of his actions.
Being confident means I am not concerned about you or the outcome of our interaction because I have an alternative or I am not dependant on this particular outcome….
Fear is caring.
Love and hate then become reactions to this fear. One pushes away and avoids, the other binds with another to shield and protect self.
Indifference is the absence of care and dependence, including caring for one’s own existence - if that is possible at all.
To be totally free would entail being free of all care, all concern, all attachment and dependence. No hope no fears and no emotions.
“I fear nothing, I hope for nothing; I am free†- Kazantzakis
The truly free would be unaffected, self-reliant, self-determining and eternal.
We see now the absurdity of a loving, caring omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, free God.
To be concerned is to be affected by another or something other than self and so, this hypothetical perfect being, is dependant on it and affected by it and so not free from it.
To be attached is to be dependant on what you are attached to and so not free.
If I am attached to another, either though love or hate, or if I am attached to the state of living I cannot say that I am totally free and so my every thought and opinion is prejudiced by this attachment.
But consciousness depends on something, as well. It depends on life to manifest itself - and life is the state of constant needing/suffering.
Therefore …….just like any other absolute in a universe that knows no such thing, freedom is only possible in degree. To be conscious is to automatically be dependant, even if it is to the state of living.
{When we make a value judgment we are subjectively comparing two states or another with ourselves or with a perceived average.
So, we often say I am free and mean that, from what I can determine, I am freer than him or them.}
[/size]
There is nothing wrong with using it as a metaphor in a self-appraised reality check, but it is the superior “I’m enlightened and you’re not” attitude that comes with it that one needs to examine. “sheeple” is not escapable in a social atmosphere, and to the extent that we are not hermits, we all wear a little wool…