Good day to you my steemian followers and all Steemit members. Today I wish to keep the same phylosofic approach and to talk about freedom and the hole concept of being free. If you like my post feel free to follow me to stay up to date with my posts. As well, any other kind of support is welcome. Thank you!
Christianity can tell a man: you have to choose the only thing you need, keeping in mind that you won't the choice again. I mean, if you lose yourself in an endless chatter, you, in fact, do not choose the right thing; must be chosen just like the kingdom of God, above all. Thus, there is something that should not be chosen and, given its concept, it can no longer be a matter of choice and which, however, is a choice. Therefore, precisely this, that there is no choice, expresses with how much intensity and passion one chooses.
The content of freedom is decisive for freedom to such an extent that the truth of freedom of choice is precisely to admit that there should be no choice, though it is a choice. It means being "spirit". But precisely because people are far from being truly people, freedom gives them a lot of headaches, as long as they remain forever attached to the freedom of choice. Reflection - which, in turn, depends on laziness, of a lower state - begins to study freedom of choice instead of recalling all the principle: "there must be no choice" - to choose from. As strange as it may seem, it must be said, therefore, that only fear, trembling and coercion can help a person to stand up for freedom: they can force him, not to choose and, therefore, to choose good. On the brink of death, most people make the best choice.
But what do science is good for now? At nothing. It reduces everything to an objective and quiet consideration and make the freedom inexplicable. From a scientific point of view, Spinoza is and remains the only logical position...
In fact, freedom exists only with this condition. In other words, at the same time, in the same second it is ( as freedom of choice ), it suits itself unconditionally, in, so far as it unconditionally binds itself, by choosing the decision, to that choice has the principle of saying: "Here, we couldn't be talking about choice!" Oops, but the human being isn't entirely only spirit.
He judges this way: if the choice is left to me, then I want to gain a little time, I want to seriously reflect on this first. Trist anticlimax! "Seriousness" is precisely choosing God immediately and "above all". Likewise, man can not act with the ghost of the evidence of freedom of choice: if he has it or does not have it, etc., it even proves it from a scientific point of view! And he does not realize that, in this way, he lost his freedom.
Thus, he enjoys, perhaps, a period of time, at the thought of freedom of choice, until there is doubt in him that he would have such a freedom. And now he also lost his freedom. With a totally wrong tactic (to express ourselves in military terms) he confuses everything. By proposing instead to choose "freedom of choice", he also loses his freedom of choice. Following the way of reflection, they can no longer be regained; if man has to regain them, he has to do it in the path of fear created by the thought that he has scattered them. If you want to save it and keep it, there is only one way: at the same moment, only in full sincerity, give it to God and you with it.
If you are tried by the vanity of keeping what you have been allowed to keep, if you give up the temptation and you look with selfish greed the freedom to choose, you will lose your freedom. And your punishment will then be wandering in some sort of orbital and affliction at the thought that freedom is yours. Poor you! It would be your conviction. You say, I have the freedom to choose, and yet you have not yet chosen God. Suppose you get sick: freedom to choose becomes a fixed idea for you; eventually brings you into the state of that rich man who thinks he has become poor and that he will die of hunger. You are suspicious that you have lost your freedom of choice; and the mistake is just that you are not deeply grieved enough, because then you would have received it again.
Anyway, this was my opinion on the concept of freedom. I do have to give some credit to a specifically work called "The Journal" - Part7 by Soren Kierkegaard. I hope you will enjoy this post and you will find my article as a good and interesting read. Until next time, Steem on!馃憤
