Что ограничивает свободу человека: Attention Required! | Cloudflare

Ограничение права на свободу передвижения путем введения режима самоизоляции. Рассуждение на тему.

Сразу ограничу тему дискуссии вопросами правотворчества и правоприменения. Про опасность вируса речи в рассуждениях нет и это тема совершенно другого разговора.

Итак, решил я проанализировать указ Мэра Москвы «О введении режима повышенной готовности» на предмет его соответствия законам и обсуждаемой так в последнее время Конституции Российской Федерации.

Указ содержит такие положения, как возложение обязанности на граждан соблюдать дистанцию до других граждан не менее 1,5 метра (социальное дистанцирование), не покидать места проживания, а для граждан, имеющих специальные пропуска, такие ограничения не распространять (пункты 9.1., 9.3. Указа Мэра Москвы от 31 марта 2020 г. № 35-УМ).

Полагая, что такие положения прямо направлены на ограничение права на свободу передвижения граждан, я решил выяснить законны ли данные ограничения. Может ли быть кто-то привлечен к ответственности за нарушение положений анализируемого Указа?

Как следует из преамбулы Указа, издан он в соответствии с подпунктом «б» пункта 6 статьи 4.1. Федерального закона от 21 декабря 1994 г. №68-ФЗ «О защите населения и территорий от чрезвычайных ситуаций природного и техногенного характера».

Находим этот закон и читаем указанный пункт: «Органы управления и силы единой государственной системы предупреждения и ликвидации чрезвычайных ситуаций функционируют в режиме повышенной готовности — при угрозе возникновения чрезвычайной ситуации». Все. Больше этот пункт ничего не содержит.

Как создаются эти органы и какие силы привлекаются для ликвидации угрозы возникновения чрезвычайной ситуации это отдельная история.

Сейчас нужно обратить внимание на то, какой введен режим. Как следует из закона — режим повышенной готовности. В общем-то, название самого Указа нам об этом и говорит.

Изучаем закон дальше.

В статье 4.1. ФЗ №68 указано, что «При введении режима повышенной готовности или чрезвычайной ситуации, а также при установлении уровня реагирования для соответствующих органов управления и сил единой государственной системы предупреждения и ликвидации чрезвычайных ситуаций Правительственная комиссия по предупреждению и ликвидации чрезвычайных ситуаций и обеспечению пожарной безопасности или должностное лицо, установленные пунктами 8 и 9 настоящей статьи, может определять руководителя ликвидации чрезвычайной ситуации, который несет ответственность за проведение этих работ в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации и законодательством субъектов Российской Федерации, и принимать дополнительные меры по защите населения и территорий от чрезвычайных ситуаций:

В частности:

д) осуществлять меры, обусловленные развитием чрезвычайной ситуации, не ограничивающие прав и свобод человека и гражданина и направленные на защиту населения и территорий от чрезвычайной ситуации, создание необходимых условий для предупреждения и ликвидации чрезвычайной ситуации и минимизации ее негативного воздействия».

И вот здесь, внимание!

Среди множества терминов и словосочетаний нужно заметить лишь одну фразу: «не ограничивающие прав и свобод человека и гражданина».

Идем за Конституций Российской Федерации и читаем пункт 1 статьи 27, где указано, что каждый, кто законно находится на территории Российской Федерации, имеет право свободно передвигаться, выбирать место пребывания и жительства.

Более того, каждый может свободно выезжать за пределы Российской Федерации. Гражданин Российской Федерации имеет право беспрепятственно возвращаться в Российскую Федерацию (пункт 2 статьи 27 Конституции).

На секунду взглянем в статью 18 Конституции, где сказано, что права и свободы человека и гражданина являются непосредственно действующими. Они определяют смысл, содержание и применение законов, деятельность законодательной и исполнительной власти, местного самоуправления и обеспечиваются правосудием.

Теперь возникает вопрос, а можно ли ограничить право на свободное передвижение? Да, можно. По этому вопросу есть две статьи в Конституции.

Пункт 3 статьи 55 Конституции, где сказано, что права и свободы человека и гражданина могут быть ограничены федеральным законом только в той мере, в какой это необходимо в целях защиты основ конституционного строя, нравственности, здоровья, прав и законных интересов других лиц, обеспечения обороны страны и безопасности государства.

И пункт 1 статьи 56 Конституции, где указано, что в условиях чрезвычайного положения для обеспечения безопасности граждан и защиты конституционного строя в соответствии с федеральным конституционным законом могут устанавливаться отдельные ограничения прав и свобод с указанием пределов и срока их действия.

Теперь мы уже знаем следующее, что конституционное право на свободное передвижение может быть ограничено либо на основании федерального закона, изданного в соответствии с пунктом 3 статьи 55 Конституции, либо при возникновении чрезвычайного положения на основании федерального конституционного закона в соответствии с пунктом 1 статьи 56 Конституции.

Так же мы знаем, что в настоящее время (на 31.03.2020) режим чрезвычайного положения не введен, а действует режим повышенной готовности. Таким образом, нам необходимо найти такой федеральный закон, который бы позволял ограничить право граждан на свободное передвижение в соответствии с пунктом 3 статьи 55 Конституции.

Какие же существуют законы, в которых есть указание на возможность ограничения права на свободное передвижение? Вот они:

-Федеральный конституционный закон от 30.01.2002 N 1-ФКЗ «О военном положении»

-Федеральный конституционный закон от 30.05.2001 N 3-ФКЗ «О чрезвычайном положении»

-Федеральный закон от 07.02.2011 N 3-ФЗ «О полиции»

-Закон РФ от 25.06.1993 N 5242-1 «О праве граждан Российской Федерации на свободу передвижения, выбор места пребывания и жительства в пределах Российской Федерации»

Итак, военного положения у нас нет, чрезвычайное положение тоже не введено, в законе о полиции речь идет о действиях сотрудников, связанных с ограничением права на свободное передвижение в случаях, предусмотренных федеральными законами (вышеперечисленными).

Остается один закон — «О праве граждан Российской Федерации на свободу передвижения, выбор места пребывания и жительства в пределах Российской Федерации».

В пункте 8 этого закона указано, что право граждан Российской Федерации на свободу передвижения, выбор места пребывания и жительства в пределах Российской Федерации в соответствии с законами Российской Федерации может быть ограничено: на отдельных территориях и в населенных пунктах, где в случае опасности распространения инфекционных и массовых неинфекционных заболеваний и отравлений людей введены особые условия и режимы проживания населения и хозяйственной деятельности.

Отлично, кажется нашли, что искали, но, кажется, возникла коллизия.

Положения одного федерального закона противоречат положению другого федерального закона.

Преодоление коллизии подобного рода возможно путем применения специальной нормы по отношению к общей. Общая норма находится в ФЗ «О праве граждан Российской Федерации на свободу передвижения, выбор места пребывания и жительства в пределах Российской Федерации», так как в этой норме прямо указано, что право на свободу передвижения может быть ограничено в соответствии с иным законом.

Таким образом специальная норма, которая находится в пункте пп. д), п. 4.1. ФЗ №68, прямо предусматривает, что осуществляемые меры, обусловленные развитием чрезвычайной ситуации, не должны ограничивать прав и свобод человека и гражданина, к которым относится и право на свободу передвижения.

В связи с вышеизложенным можно сделать вывод, что требования о социальном дистанцировании, запрете на выход из места проживание, а тем более необходимость наличия специального пропуска для свободного передвижения, является ничем иным, как ограничением конституционного права на свободное передвижение.

И такие ограничения при текущем нормативном регулировании могут рассматриваться только как просьба.

Следовательно, ни к какой ответственности за нарушение данной просьбы гражданин привлечен быть не может, а действия исполнительной власти, связанные с принудительным помещением граждан в больницы или установление времени посещения улиц и магазинов, являются незаконными.

90000 Freedom’s Journey: Understanding Human Trafficking 90001 90002 Survivors of human trafficking have a unique role to play to help prevent exploitation and inform laws to combat these crimes. The Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking (CAST), based in Los Angeles, is one organization working to empower survivors to share their stories and advocate for better policies to address the needs of victims. Angela Guanzon shared her journey from victim to advocate. 90003 90004 Angela Guanzon, 39 90005 90006 90002 From a golden opportunity to a nightmare, Angela’s move from the Philippines to California to earn money for her ailing father quickly devolved as her labor trafficker used threats and intimidation to force her into a grueling work schedule with paltry pay.90003 90002 Coming to America was like «winning the lottery,» Angela Guanzon said. In her home country of the Philippines, many workers are hired for short-term contracts that end before the six-month mark so companies can avoid requirements to hire them as regular employees. She says the seemingly never-ending cycle of job searching was also complicated by widespread age discrimination in the labor market against workers older than 30. With an ailing father whose medical expenses were costly, Guanzon jumped at the chance to earn money for her family when she heard about a job opportunity to become a caregiver in the United States.90003 90002 But Guanzon’s dream opportunity quickly became a nightmare. Upon arriving at her new place of work in California in 2005, Guanzon’s trafficker claimed she was owed $ 12,000 and that Guanzon would be required to work for 10 years. The woman also stole her passport, a tactic many traffickers use to maintain leverage over victims. 90003 90002 «When she told me that, it did not register in my mind that the numbers did not make sense,» Guanzon said. «I was so overwhelmed that I did not even think about it.All I could think was that I had to earn money so that I could send money to my family in the Philippines. «90003 90002 For two-and-a-half years, Guanzon worked as a caregiver for elderly patients, forced to sleep in hallways and eat table scraps, while enduring a grueling schedule that began at 4 a.m. and ended at 10:30 p.m. 90003 90002 At night, she was expected to wake up every two hours to check on her eight patients. Guanzon was rarely given a day off and earned a paltry salary of just $ 600 a month, $ 300 of which her trafficker garnished as repayment.And while she was spared physical abuse, her and her fellow caregivers were verbally and emotionally abused, frequently subjected to intimidation tactics and threats. 90003 90002 «All I could think was that I had to earn money so that I could send money to my family in the Philippines.» 90003 90002 «She would threaten that if we were to talk to anybody about our situation, especially white people, and they discovered that we were undocumented, they would call the police and then the police would call immigration and we would end up in jail,» Guanzon said.»She would warn that if we told the police that we lived in the facility and worked there, she would deny us and tell the police that she did not know us.» 90003 90002 It was her exhausting work schedule that eventually caught the attention of a neighbor. As Guanzon was taking one of her patients for a morning walk around the block, the pair stopped in front of a neighbor’s house, like they typically did, to smell the flowers in his garden. Having seen her many times before, the owner of the house asked about when she had a day off, to which she would always provide the same response — yesterday.90003 90002 According to Guanzon, the neighbor finally said, «You know, everytime I ask you if you had a day off, you say you did yesterday. But I saw you there yesterday. I know that something is wrong and something is going on there . » 90003 90002 For two-and-a-half years, Guanzon worked as a caregiver for elderly patients, forced to sleep in hallways and eat table scraps, while enduring a grueling schedule that began at 4 a.m. and ended at 10:30 p.m. 90003 90002 Nervous, Guanzon dismissed his concerns and thanked him for his time.But her neighbor refused to give up. When they crossed paths again on a later walk, the man slipped her a piece of paper with his number on it and told her to call him if she needed help. Eventually, she worked up the courage to call him on her prepaid phone, but her nerves took over again and she quickly ended the call, apologizing that she misdialed him. That was all he needed. 90003 90002 It was not long after that Guanzon received a text message from a woman claiming to be from the FBI who encouraged her to reach out for help.But she was still nervous about whether she could trust this new connection. 90003 90002 «I kept wondering whether it was true or whether it was just my trafficker testing me …. If you are a victim, trust is very hard to give to somebody else,» she said. «And then I realized, I’m in a bad situation already. I do not know if I can wait 10 years working here. I might end up killing myself.» 90003 90002 Taking a leap of faith, she contacted the FBI agent, who wanted to set up a meeting.By chance, Guanzon was given a day off the following weekend and arranged to meet the agent at a nearby parking lot. 90003 90002 «I remember walking there, and it felt like walking in a tunnel,» she said. «I did not know if I was going to see the light and if it was true. My heart was pounding.» 90003 90002 Guanzon’s risk paid off when she saw the FBI agent, who introduced herself, as well as an immigration agent. She spent the meeting recounting her experience being trafficked and living and working at the facility.Unfortunately, without documentation to show proof that she was being exploited, the agents said they would be unable to build a case against her trafficker. 90003 90002 «They told me that if I wanted to go back to the Phillipines, they could send me and that’s it. But if I was willing to help build a case against her, we could also help others,» she said. «I kept thinking maybe I’m here to stop her.» 90003 90002 Taking a leap of faith, she contacted the FBI agent, who wanted to set up a meeting.By chance, Guanzon was given a day off the following weekend and arranged to meet the agent at a nearby parking lot. 90003 90002 Wearing a wire, Guanzon successfully convinced her trafficker to discuss the terms of her working situation, her salary and her passport. But the FBI wanted to build a stronger case and needed Guanzon to encourage a fellow caregiver, Jason, to get involved. It took him about two weeks to think it over, but Jason eventually agreed to participate in a staged runaway to see whether their trafficker would call the cops and report him.She did, claiming that he stole money from her. A week later, Guanzon also ran away. She was connected to services at the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking (CAST) and lived in their shelter while the FBI built a case against her trafficker. In 2008, her trafficker was sentenced to five years in prison. 90003 90002 With newfound freedom, Guanzon went to school to become a certified nurse’s assistant and was able to move out of the shelter. But she was not quite ready to leave her family at CAST behind.She decided to attend a meeting of the group’s Survivor Advisory Caucus, a leadership development program that encourages survivors to share their stories and advocate on behalf of victims. 90003 90002 «It was very, very empowering when I saw what they do, especially coming from my country where we would have had no voice,» Guanzon said. 90003 90002 «I wanted to give back to the community and to help other victims, because sometimes they lose hope. People changed my life, so I wanted to help change others ‘lives too.»90003 90002 Working with the lawyers at CAST, Guanzon began providing input into potential laws and policies that could help prevent victimization. She helped to develop SB 477, state legislation that required greater oversight of foreign labor contractors. She also testified before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, providing insight into how to better prevent trafficking. 90003 90002 «I was sitting in front of members of Congress and thinking, ‘OK, these are very powerful people and I’m just me.’I went from being a victim and survivor, and now they are listening to me, «Guanzon recalled.» Now, when I talk in a room full of people, they listen to me, and it’s not only because they want to hear my story, it’s because they want to know how to help other people. «90003 90002 «I wanted to give back to the community and to help other victims, because sometimes they lose hope. People changed my life, so I wanted to help change others ‘lives too.» 90003 90002 But while Guanzon is happy to be making a difference with policymakers, she believes that everybody has a role to play to ensure that victims are protected from exploitation.She says people need to be more aware of their surroundings and educated about the signs of trafficking. 90003 90002 «Especially with labor trafficking, it can be very hard to spot, because you think people are happy and fine where they are working,» Guanzon said. «Victims of human trafficking are always in a situation where they do not have a choice and, many times, do not know how to get out. For those victims that are still out there, I hope and wish that we can help them find their way out and get help.»90003 .90000 Should we limit human population growth? 90001 90002 90003 You humans are the # 1 cause of loss of life to biodiversity and you pesky humans are also the leading cause of pollution. The ONLY way for humanity to survive for the next century is to embrace education and use technology for the better good. Humans who contribute to waste by a factor of 18 times more than they contribute to cleaning up should be euthanized. Also repeat violent criminals should be honorably euthanized as well. Parents should have 2 children, if they do not produce a male the first two times then they can go for a 3rd, but after that no more babies, unless the parents can prove that they are well beyond their means in the ability to support the family.90004 90005 90006 90007 We will Eventually Have to Do it 90008 90003 I believe we need to limit the population on planet Earth to 10 billion. Not because of oil and gas usage, but if food usage. Oil and will be replaced by electricity by 2025 if the electric trend continues. But food is a different story; according to studies, the uppermost population limit is 10 billion, anything past that number will result in feeding problems. Today though, food is not a problem. The reason why people think that it is, is because of Africa.Because Africa has food growing difficulties because of the planet heating up due to the CO2 we release in the atmosphere while driving gas cars, whichs heats there crop fields. But as I stated earlier, gas cars should be replaced by 2025 if the electric trend continues. Humanity will not stop at this number; if everything continues as planned with the space program, we should begin colonization of the planet Mars by 2050 (the first landing should occur by 2035). That is well within our lifetimes! Since Mars is about half the size of Earth, then Mars should be able to hold just under 5 billion people.Which brings up the population to nearly 15 billion! It it will continue growing as we reach out for the stars. 90004 90005 90012 90007 Time to grow up 90008 90003 There is no longer any use for high populations as we move into a post industrial society. It’s childish to presume that all people are born with the right to reproduce. These are ideas from a more primitive, selfish society of greed and assumed self importance. It’s time for people to grow up. We’re owed nothing, we owe everything to this blue planet.90004 90005 90018 90007 We should limit it because 90008 90003 If human population keeps increasing, more people can be born. Water, food and other natural resources will be harder to get because there are more people. If we do not limmit the population people might starve because more people will need more food and other resources. There might be a fight for food, water, space, clothing and some other things. 90004 90005 90024 90007 If there should ever be a law … 90008 90003 Name for me a single thing that would improve if the world population increased to 9 billion.Name for me 100 things that would improve if world population settled at 1 billion. I find it infinitely easier to honestly answer the second question. Would you seriously sacrifice everything for a misplaced sense of freedom? 90004 90005 90030 90007 We need to control. 90008 90003 We do not have enough food to sustain higher populations meaning that if we did not control the population we would run out of food quite quickly. So if you think ‘NOPE we should not control’ think about the fact that we would run out of food too quickly if we did not control.90004 90005 90036 90007 We need more education 90008 90003 The fact is that a major reason why the world is overpopulated is that too many people do not realize the effects too many people have on the planet. If people, especially women, were better educated, then they could understand why a large population is bad in the long term. With better education, women also would have more opportunities to learn and have jobs, which could lead to them not having as many children. 90004 90005 90042 90007 The earth is not big enough! 90008 90003 Families used to have many children because: 90046 a) Many of them would die from sickness, and 90046 b) More children meant more hands for farming 90046 Nowadays, infant mortality rates are low and families do not need more children to make money.Having more than 2 children is not necessary anymore. If we let the population grow anymore, there will be mass famines in the future. 90004 90005 90051 90007 We are this world’s worst disease 90008 90003 We can not put an end to the Sickness. .That would mean our own extinction and no one wants that, But we have to control it to a point where we can all continue with our lives without Killing our Host !!! 90046 Lets Face it We Are The Problem 90046 !! Learn, To Survive !! 90004 90005 90059 90007 We NEED population control urgently worldwide 90008 90003 There is no need for large families.There is no need for x billion number of people. We need to focus on improving our technology and research, education, getting in a world government so all the countries are ran equally, reducing our population, putting more wild space between ecologically friendly homes and improve our healthcare tenfold AND WE MUST MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE WHO CONTRIBUTES TO OUR SPECIES. Those should be our aims. 90046 This is not a war. This is the brink. If we can not dramatically reduce our population then our world as humans is going to crash, 90046 The technology exists now to immediately help, but it is expensive and only the rich can afford it.We have the technology to power our homes independently and clean our air. 90046 Money is old now AND IT IS FAILING because it is becoming too common and too many people earn too much while contributing very little. We should be classed more on our contributions to society to give us our social status, not how much money we have. 90046 If money did not exist and your contribution was highly valued in your society (bearing in mind a society of less people) and you were asked to give a helping hand building a home for a homeless person, would you say yes? Or would you slam the door? 90046 We need to pull together as a species on this subject.If we do not choose now it will eventually be forced by nature herself. 90046 It is not just ourselves as people that are ruining our planet. It is also our farms, our livestock and (sadly) even our pets. 90046 Each household should be permitted only one or two children. 90046 We have to see the bigger picture. 90046 60% of UK wildlife is declining. I did not notice before, but now I do. There has been an incredible drop in wildlife in my town over the past five years. 90046 We can not just halt the population, it needs to be reduced and humans may have to interfere with nature to bring it back since we have done so much damage.90046 I want my child to have a bright and natural future. Not surviving in a concrete matrix. 90046 Imagine what a better life there could be with more environmentally friendly technology, nature and less people. 90004 90005 90077.90000 God and Human Freedom | Reformed Bible Studies & Devotionals at Ligonier.org 90001 90002 «Jesus answered, ‘You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above'» (v. 11a). 90003 — John 19 90002 One of the most difficult concepts to understand in Scripture is the relationship between the sovereign providence of God and human freedom. How can God ordain everything yet not violate human freedom? We must understand that God uses free moral agents to bring about His purposes.Just as He uses secondary causes of all sorts to exercise His will, so He uses the decisions and actions of human beings. We each act freely within God’s sovereign government, gloriously bringing about His good will through everything we think, say, and do. 90003 90002 Providence in no way violates human freedom, but directs it. Human choices, evil and good, are part of God’s providence. This can be understood in light of the doctrine of concurrence, which refers to actions of two or more parties that run parallel with one another, acting in conjunction toward the same end.We see this doctrine in action when God gave Satan permission to attack Job (Job 1). God ordained everything that would happen to Job, and He used Satan to bring about His purposes. 90003 90002 We also find God’s directing of human decisions in the most cataclysmic event in history-the crucifixion of Christ. This event did not sneak up on God as if He did not expect it, but it was ordained from eternity. Acts 2:23 confirms God’s ordaining this event saying Jesus was «delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God.»Later we see that God used free human agents to bring about His purposes:» Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed. They did what Your power and will had decided beforehand should happen «(Acts 4: 27-28 NIV). While Judas, Herod, Pilate, and all the people who condemned Jesus acted freely, God had ordained beforehand what would occur in order to bring about the glory of redemption.Through Christ’s death all His people would be saved. God would be glorified and His people would taste the happiness that comes through communion with God. God does not compel people to act contrary to their own desires, but uses their free decisions to bring about His glorious will. 90003 90010 Coram Deo 90011 90002 Read Acts 27. How is God’s sovereign providence revealed in this incident? Paul assures the men that they would be saved, but he also stresses their responsibility in verse 31.What does this teach you about your own freedom, responsibility, and God’s ruling providence? 90003 90010 Passages for Further Study 90011 90002 Job 1 90017 Proverbs 16:33 90017 Acts 4: 23-31 90003 .90000 The concepts of human freedom and radical questioning in the works … 90001 90002 The concepts of human freedom and radical questioning in the works of Plato, René Descartes, and Albert Camus 90003 90004 The human freedom and the human capability to reflect about the circumstances of our existence are phenomenons that have puzzled philosophers, anthropologists and other scientists alike, since we can think. Over the course of history, especially the art of philosophy has seen many great thinkers reflecting on the nature of human freedom: Three of them — Plato, René Descartes, and Albert Camus — are the material on which this paper will retrace the development of the interpretation of human freedom.In doing so, it is very important to, first of all, define how Plato, Descartes, and Camus saw human freedom. After that, we can have a look at the key differences that are — or maybe are not — findable when comparing Plato’s «Republic» 90005 1 90006 and Descartes ‘ «Meditations on First Philosophy» 90005 2 90006, as well as when comparing Descartes’ work and Camus ‘ «The Myth of Sisyphus» 90005 3 90006. The goal of this analysis is to examine how the conception of human freedom changed from Plato over Descartes to Camus.This is crucial to completing the third and last part of this paper. That will be determining which thinker was most thoroughly committed to the radical questioning of things, that we nowadays hold to be the core value of philosophy. However, the goal of this paper is not to determine, who was the «best» philosopher, but rather to show how different their conceptions of human freedom and the human capacity to ask questions truly were. 90011 90004 90013 Plato’s understanding of human freedom: political freedom as the enemy of a good individual and a good society 90014 90011 90004 In Plato’s philosophy, humans are not equally well equipped in terms of their mental capacity to make morally and practically sound decisions.Plato starts with the assertion (that sounds logical, even to modern thinkers) that every human being has a specified talent and should therefore be assigned to a specific job. 90005 4 90006 This logically leads him to the conclusion that there can only be certain people that are capable of ruling 90005 5 90006. According to Plato’s statement, not every citizen, but precisely only those who are fit to ruling, are capable of leading the society, and thus every individual, towards «the good» 90005 6 90006.But what is the good? This question is probably too complex to answer in barely one page, but regarding our main question, we can work with the following explanation: Plato argues that there is a fundamentally good principle in the universe that gives sense and an order to life. He compares it to the sun that sheds light on the world, making it possible to see everything that is important 90005 7 90006: «Furthermore, you also know that the masses believe pleasure to be the good, while the more refined believe it to be knowledge.»90005 8 90006 Knowing everything that is good is knowing the good itself 90005 9 90006, and vice versa. This definition of the good is so important, because it shows us what Plato thinks about freedom: In theory, everybody is free to chose a profession, to vote for one party or another, to do one thing or another, etc. According to Plato, these ‘free’ decisions are all motivated by the desire to get «the good» 90005 10 90006. But because the ordinary farmer or shoemaker or soldier, etc. does not know what is good for him 90005 11 90006, a society relies on philosophers to lead it towards the good (or to make good decisions for it): the philosopher’s job is to determine what is good for everybody.This becomes clear when we have a quick concluding look at Plato’s thoughts on democracy: 90011 90004 Well, in the first place, are not they free? And is not the city full of freedom and freedom of speech? And is not there license in it to do whatever one wants? […] And it would, it seems, be a pleasant constitution — lacking rulers but not complexity, and assigning a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike. 90005 12 90006 90011 90004 Philosophical freedom can only exist when true philosophers (those who know what is good) rule a society and prevent everybody else from making false decisions and enslaving themselves to what they believe is good, but what is in reality only their lowest desires.90011 90004 90013 René Descartes ‘understanding of human freedom: free will as a precondition to philosophical thinking: 90014 90011 90004 Contrary to Plato, René Descartes does not see freedom as the achievement of philosophers, but rather as the necessary prerequisite to doing philosophy in the first place. But we will have a look on the exact comparison in the second part of the paper. For Descartes, the real question is not what is «the good», but rather whether we can possibly ever find out about it.In order to find out, whether our hitherto accumulated knowledge maps on to an external reality, Descartes starts by clearing his head off any idea that could be false — he looks for a foundation to build his philosophy on, by doubting every idea that is not entirely self-evident. 90005 13 90006 However, Descartes can be certain of the existence of at least one (entirely self-evident) entity: «[…] I must finally conclude and maintain that this proposition: 90013 I am, I exist 90014, is necessarily true every time that I pronounce it or conceive it in my mind.»90005 14 90006 Even if nothing else is real — the thinking substance, called» I «, must exist, because thinking requires existence. Subsequently, Descartes concludes that we can also not doubt our ideas of corporeal things (we can only doubt whether they exist beyond the mind) 90005 15 90006. So, he divides the world into minds (entities that think) and bodies (entities that occupy space) 90005 16 90006. He goes on and claims that the existence of God — or an «infinite substance, eternal, immutable, independent, omniscient, omnipotent» 90005 17 90006 that created him and everything else that may exist — would also imply the existence of bodies.90005 18 90006 Following from that, God stood in the beginning of a long and everlasting chain of causes and consequences, that (again) build the cause for the next consequence, etc. This applies to the bodies and makes up the main distinction between minds and bodies: While bodies rely on an external cause to move, the actions of the mind are determined by its free will. 90005 19 90006 In this respect, the mind is equal to God 90005 20 90006, the cause of (also philosophical) ideas is the human capacity to have a free and creative will.90011 90004 90013 Albert Camus ‘understanding of human freedom: freedom as the meed for a thorough philosophical inquiry 90014 90011 90004 For Albert Camus, as for Plato, there are also two different ways of interpreting human freedom: There is the freedom that everybody has to chose between options, to do / think / refuse / etc. one thing or another, and then there is the «Absurd freedom» 90005 21 90006, that is in his view the only kind of true freedom. What does he mean by that? By freedom, Camus obviously (again) refers to the human capability of choosing between options.But the word absurd has a surprising meaning here: The absurd (or rather the absurdity of life) results from the human need to find a meaning in life and the universe’s constant silence facing those human questions 90005 22 90006. Camus does not ask, what the meaning of life is, or whether we can possibly know it — he wants to know how «to live without appeal» 90005 23 90006 — without a meaning in life. According to Albert Camus, the only way of overcoming the Absurdity of life is to be defiant towards it, to revolt 90005 24 90006.The individual that has truly overcome the Absurd lives according to the motto «now more than ever». And from this results the Camusian «Absurd freedom»: Because the individual can see no sense in life, it can literally do whatever it wants — as long as it is willing to take the full responsibility for its actions (as there is no more sense in life, there can also be no external justifications). And as there are no external motivations — religions, ideologies, politics, etc. — the individual can live only according to its very own innermost motivations.For Camus, this is pure freedom: «One of the only coherent [that is to mean honest towards oneself, not rejecting what you already know is true: the Absurd] philosophical positions is thus revolt. […] That revolt gives life its value. » 90005 25 90006 90011 90004 90013 Differences and similarities in the three thinkers ‘views of human freedom: 90014 90011 90004 90013 Plato and René Descartes: 90014 90011 90004 So far, we have seen that all three philosophers, Plato, Descartes, and Camus, acknowl- edge the human capacity to chose between multiple options.What distinguishes these thinkers from one another is, whether they call this «freedom». This becomes especially clear, when we compare what Plato asserted to what René Descartes said. Plato acknowledges — as already stated — the human (political) freedom to chose 90005 26 90006. But he does not see it as true freedom, because there is no free will! According to Plato, political freedom inevitably leads to chaos: When a human being is free to pursue whichever desire it wants to pursue, the weaker humans chose to fulfill their lower desires 90005 27 90006, thus enslaving themselves to always satisfy their hunger for more and ultimately going insane.Only those who know the good know whether any desire is contained by the «form of the good» 90005 28 90006: Hence, they have to constrain the lowest desires of the weak, in order to lead them to the good. 90005 29 90006 For Plato, there can only be freedom in knowing the good and pursuing one of its elements. 90011 90004 René Descartes came over thousand years later and was confronted with the legacy of this antique philosophy — which is why he decided to start anew. Contrary to Plato, Descartes does not admit any corrupting force to the free will.Decisions can be false, but only because of our imperfect knowledge 90005 30 90006, that may cause us to draw false conclusions. But, according to Descartes, we are equal to God in our free will: 90011 90004 […] our free will consists only in the fact that in affirming or denying, pursuing or avoiding the things suggested by the understanding, we behave in such a way that we do not feel that any external force [like Plato’s ‘lowest desires ‘] has constrained us in our decision. 90005 31 90006 90011 90004 Following this, we can see the clear confrontation between Plato’s unfree (because philosophically not capable to live freely) lower classes and Descartes ‘claim that the minds have a free and uncorrupted will, and thus are free.90011 90004 90013 René Descartes and Albert Camus: 90014 90011 90004 Regarding Descartes ‘and Camus’ perspectives on human freedom, one can already tell that there is no real fundamental difference between them. Descartes insists, on the uncorrupted and God-like human free will. Albert Camus does not really oppose this. According to him, humans can only constrain themselves. Unlike Plato, who diagnosed an unfree mind to weaker humans, Camus shows us that humans have the capability and possibility to become the «Absurd man» 90005 32 90006.Descartes and Camus both share with us the modern notion of the free will, that humans can do what they want. The only minor difference is that Camus sees the rejection of all totalitarian religions or ideologies (be it Christianity, Communism, or a radical faith in science) as a necessary precondition to stripping off all external motivations or constraints and to making adequate use of that free will. 90011 90004 Now that we had a detailed look on the conceptions of human freedom and free will that the three thinkers postulate, and how the may (or may not) differ from each other, it is time to address the following question: 90011 90004 90013 Which conception of freedom is the biggest commitment to the radical questioning that we hold to be the core value of philosophy? 90014 90011 90004 Before we tackle the question, it might be worthwhile to pause for a moment and reflect on what the question is actually asking for.By «the biggest commitment to radical questioning» we could understand two things: Firstly, which philosopher is committed the most to radical questioning? As this question is not related to the philosophers conception of human freedom, it is obviously not what the question above is referring to. But we could also interpret it this way: Which philosopher does best inspire radical questioning in other people? If we give this question a moment to unfold, we see that it must be what the question above meant.The more thorough the conception of human freedom is, the greater should also be the call to people to question the sense and functionality of their surroundings. 90011 90004 When we then put the question this way, it becomes fairly obvious that Plato is not inspiring people to pose questions. He instead claims that the majority of people is not fit to question. They would rely on philosophers to free them from their lower desires. Any attempt to do philosophy on their own would result in chaos — as would the philosopher’s attempt to run a farm.90011 90004 As we progress, it should become clear that also Albert Camus does not really inspire us to question. Now this statement might come rather surprising, because Camus does warn his reader not to be seduced by any easy-to-comprehend ideologies or religions that want to tell people what to do (after all, the book was written in the 1940s). This obviously requires some questioning. However, his method to overcome the absurdity of life — to revolt and be defiant — is just a recommendation to live one’s life as pleasantly as possible, while it lasts (as beautiful as he may put it).He might as well have said: «If you find pleasure in doing philosophy — go ahead and do philosophy! But do not expect to get definite and clear answers for your burning questions. Otherwise you’ll get ‘undermined’ 90005 33 90006. » If everybody followed Albert Camus most radically, philosophy would become irrelevant: If the absurdity of life can not be resolved, why should we continue to ask questions, when we could have a good time instead? 90011 90004 After considering Plato and Camus, only René Descartes remains to examine.Descartes sees the human free will — and thus human freedom — as the basic human quality. He encourages us to find out how things work as they do 90005 34 90006, and why they work as they do. After all, Descartes laid the foundations for modern science by his mechanistic philosophy: the distinction between minds (of which we know how they work) and bodies (of which we should find our, how they work), as well as his cause-and -consequence theory encouraged many scientists to question established opinions in their particular fields and laid the foundation for the epistemology.Although modern science widely refuted Descartes ‘assertions about God, he shows us the essence of philosophy: asking questions and inspiring answers without fearing those answers. 90011 90004 90135 Notes: 90136 90011 90004 90135 […] 90136 90011 90142 90004 90005 1 90006 Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, trans. C. D. C. Reeve (Indianapolis, USA: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 2004). 90011 90004 90005 2 90006 René Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, trans.Laurence J. Lafleur (New Jersey, USA: PrenticeHall Inc., 1997). 90011 90004 90005 3 90006 Albert Camus, 90013 The Myth of Sisyphus: And other Essays 90014 (New York, USA: Vintage International, 1991). 90011 90004 90005 4 90006 Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 370a + b. 90011 90004 90005 5 90006 He explains this in his so-called «noble lie» (Ibid., 414c) — a metaphor to explain weaker minds Plato’s reasoning: «Although all of you in the city are brothers […] when the god was forming you, he mixed gold into those of you who are capable of ruling, which is why they are most honorable; silver into the auxiliaries; and iron and bronze into the farmers and craftsmen.[…] the first and greatest command from the god to the rulers is that there is nothing they must guard better […] than the mixture of metals in the souls of their offspring. «See Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 415a-c. 90011 90004 90005 6 90006 Ibid., 504E. 90011 90004 90005 7 90006 Ibid., 504E-509a. 90011 90004 90005 8 90006 Ibid., 505b5. 90011 90004 90005 9 90006 Or as Plato would says: the «form of the good». See Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 509a. 90011 90004 90005 10 90006 Ibid., 505b. 90011 90004 90005 11 90006 It is good to have a look at Plato’s Analogy of the divided line here: Ordinary people are not capable of understanding more than mere beliefs. See Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 511b. 90011 90004 90005 12 90006 Ibid., 557b5-558c. 90011 90004 90005 13 90006 In detail, Descartes says: «Everything which I have thus far accepted as entirely true and assumed has been acquired by the senses. But I have learned by experience that these senses sometimes mislead me, and it is prudent never to trust wholly those things which have once deceived us.»See Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, p. 18. 90011 90004 90005 14 90006 Ibid., P. 24. 90011 90004 90005 15 90006 Ibid., P. 29f. 90011 90004 90005 16 90006 Ibid., P. 30. 90011 90004 90005 17 90006 Ibid., P. 43. 90011 90004 90005 18 90006 Descartes claims that God must exist for a number of reasons. The most important reason however, is that the humand mind would not be perfect enough to account for the idea of ​​a perfect God. In detail, he says that a perfect idea can not be caused by an imperfect mind.For a more thorough explanation, see Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, p. 44-46. 90011 90004 90005 19 90006 Ibid., P. 68ff. 90011 90004 90005 20 90006 Only our limited options to pursue our will differentiate us from God, see Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, p. 55. 90011 90004 90005 21 90006 Camus, 90013 The Myth of Sisyphus 90014, p. 51. 90011 90004 90005 22 90006 Ibid., P. 15. 90011 90004 90005 23 90006 Ibid., P. 53. 90011 90004 90005 24 90006 Ibid., P. 54f. 90011 90004 90005 25 90006 Ibid. 90011 90004 90005 26 90006 Once again, it is helpful to consider Plato’s description of democracy. See Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 557b5-558c. 90011 90004 90005 27 90006 See Plato’s description of the tyrant for more details: Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 571a-576e. 90011 90004 90005 28 90006 Ibid., 505b. 90011 90004 90005 29 90006 This is illustrated in Plato’s allegory of the cave: the non-enlightened prisoners in the cave, who worship mere shadows of forms (equal to illusions in the real world) rely on the more refined to free them, and bring them to the outside world.See Plato, 90013 Republic 90014, 514a-520E. 90011 90004 90005 30 90006 Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, p. 55. 90011 90004 90005 31 90006 Ibid. 90011 90004 90005 32 90006 Camus, 90013 The Myth of Sisyphus 90014, p. 66. 90011 90004 90005 33 90006 Ibid., P. 4. 90011 90004 90005 34 90006 Descartes, 90013 Meditations on First Philosophy 90014, p. 67f. 90011 .