Freedom

Are Liberty and Freedom synonymous? Liberty by necessity includes freedom; but freedom is not solely defined as liberty. I have been thinking about freedom in regards to our recent topics on love and marriage and was planning to cover this as a philosophical topic after the "Love and Sacrifice" post; but thought I would discuss it today.

First, what is Liberty? Most generally defined: The condition of being free from restriction or control.

What then is Freedom? Philosophically speaking, it would be defined: the power to exercise choice and make decisions without constraint from within or without; autonomy; self-determination.

From Webster's Dictionary: "Liberty & Freedom, these words, though often interchanged, are distinct in some of their applications. Liberty has reference to previous restraint; freedom, to the simple, unrepressed exercise of our powers."

A slave may not have his liberty, but he still is free to act or not act; he has freedom over his interior, his thoughts, his desires, even though he may be physically bound. Liberty necessitates freedom, but we can be free without liberty.

Freedom {as the power to exercise choice} is tied to our intelligence and as such is solely a characteristic of man. As human beings, we can choose to act or not act; however this usually means that we have been presented with the option and that we understand the implications/consequences our actions will bring.

EG: Little Adam was given a baseball for his birthday. He was told to not throw the ball in the house, but to go outdoors to play with his new gift. Adam went outside for a while to play but it was so hot he decided to return indoors. Still wanting to play with his ball, he begins to toss it around the living room. *CRASH* Mom's favorite vase falls to the floor and breaks. Adam chose to throw the ball in the house and as such consequences followed. Now, Adam is without a baseball.

Adam could have chosen to not throw the ball in the house, but he decided he would go against his parents' wishes and do it anyway. Adam knew that he was not supposed to. In order to make a choice and exercise our free will, we must understand the consequences of said action.

How would this story change if Adam were only a three year old? What if he is eighteen? Obviously, a three year old cannot possibly understand the full extent of his actions, but an eighteen year old can.

Ultimately, our free will and our intelligence lead us to desire and appreciate our liberty. Freedom {as the exercise of choice} does bear with it a responsibility; a responsibility to the good and to the truth.

What do you think?

Love & Marriage

No. 3 and the consideration of the subject of marriage have lead me to additional musings that may be our subject for a little while. One of my favorite books is "Love and Responsibility" by Karol Wojtyla. It is a philosophical consideration of the subject of love, freedom and the human person. It was the basis for several papers I decided to write in college and has been the ember which ignited a passion in me. So much so, I have considered continuing my studies in Marriage and Family Life.

Anyway, enough about that. Let's take a step back before we continue on. Let's jump back to before the "I Do's" and try to understand why it is that people get married to begin with. With a study of that all too famous four-letter word, L-O-V-E.

What is love? Probably one of the more common of the basic, human philosophical questions that gets asked today. Although it is usually predicated by the question, "Am I in love?” From young and old alike, the query is posed. If you look up Love on dictionary.com, you will find a whole smattering of romantic sentimentalism. Now, truth be told, I am a hopeless romantic and such would be the definition if you ask anyone who knows me. However, I prefer a stronger, deeper and classical answer to this age old question as most simply defined: to will the good of the beloved for his own sake.

Now, my readers, you may be thinking... that doesn't sound particularly romantic. Where are all the hearts, candles and sentimentality? Well it just takes a little deciphering. It did for me when I had just heard it for the first time.

Think back to that first love, that first declaration. When you heard someone {not related to you} declare their love to you. Or if it has not happened yet, hang on, you still should be able to understand the following example.

It is a starry night in mid-summer. The moon is coloring the world in warm hues, and you look at each other. You have anticipated this moment for a while. And all of a sudden your beloved looks in your eyes and says "I love you." You just gaze back, trying to let it sink in. Knowing that the declaration has been made is glorious. Now your beloved continues, "I love you because of the moonbeams, the scent in the summer air, the mist in the water and the fireflies darting about. This is why I love you."

If you were that person standing there, listening to this, what would you be thinking? Most likely, you would be thinking, "How does that have anything to do with me? If those are the things that are making you love me, than anyone could be standing here and you could love anyone." And you would be right to think that!

But, if your beloved continued his declaration as, "I love you because you are you, your beauty, your charm, your positive outlook and caring nature, the joy you bring to my life, and the way you understand me." Now, you would be thinking, "This person is truly declaring their love to me, how shall I respond?" And obviously if you love them too, you declare it right back.

What is the difference between the two? The first example, love is declared due to outside circumstances. Things that can change and have no relation to the beloved. In the second example the lover loves the beloved for who they are as a person, not because the moon is shining. But because they have experienced the other as a true good (1). Karol Wojtyla in "Love and Responsibility" says that 'the human person is a good toward which the only proper response is love.'

Back to the definition of love. If you experience the beloved as truly unique, one whom you love, what would you desire to give them? You would want them to have every good thing, right? You would want their happiness, and not only would you wish this for them, but even strive to attain it, right? Now enter the candles and teddy bears; the bestowal of gifts and surprises, to show that you think of that person when you are not together and that you want them to know how much you care. So, this definition not only allows for the sentimental expressions of love, but also a deepening of affection into a lifelong commitment to strive to love the other, no matter the cost.

Up next, love & sacrifice.

Footnotes:
(1) Aristotle distinguished between intrinsic and extrinsic goods. Intrinsic goods are those valued for themselves alone such as health and happiness. Extrinsic or instrumental goods are desirable for the sake of something else, such as money or tools.

Musings on Marriage

I saw a couple of headlines recently that with the drop in the economy, there is also a drop in the divorce rate. I was thinking about it this morning and was curious as to why. Obviously during a recession, jobs are uncertain and money is tight. So, here are some of my musings on the causal relation between divorce and recession:

1) Money is tight and there isn't the extra cashflow for legal and attorney fees, etc.

2) If you get divorced, one or both spouses will get displaced. This means money for moving, security deposits or an additional mortgage, additional furnishings, etc. Setting up another home as we all know is expensive. And who during this time would like to take on another housing payment?

3) A more optimistic thought would be that with money tight and so much uncertainty, a couple bands together (maybe even without knowing it) and works harder to pay bills and stay afloat. So they are focusing on something other than "Am I Happy?" and are throwing their extra energy into providing for each other and children. This then gives a sense of accomplishment, or at least a goal to work towards and therefore the constant questioning of whether or not "I am happy" is put-off.

No. 3 as the most optimistic of the bunch would lead to an additional question... would the couples who were considering divorce but didn't due to economic reasons, do they just get divorced when the economy stabilizes? I venture to think that some do. But maybe some work through it. Maybe they realized the strength that they have as a couple and as individuals and decided that they could make it work?

More tomorrow.

The Gimme-Now Culture

It is just so apparently clear to me after reading several news feeds over the past few days of how obsessed we are as a culture with instant gratification. Now I know this is not a new concept {at least maybe not to most of my readers}. But it goes way beyond the faster, newer, cooler techno-gadgets and gizmos. It is how generations are being "wired". Whatever happened to saving to buy what you want? Now it’s plastic to the rescue. Or waiting until marriage? No need, that's an "archaic" rule-based-system. Or wait your turn. Why should I, I am more important then that woman behind me. Or, the good will conquer in the end {add the old saying; good things come to those who wait}. Well, who said anything about evil or good? That's some kind of moral-mumbo-jumbo. Everyone knows that it’s all relative.

But how is it that one day, not so long ago, morality was not relative, people believed in good and evil and a being greater than themselves. But who is right, our forefathers or us? Are we more "enlightened" then they were?

So many of the modern "philosophers" would say yes. We have been loosed from the shackles of rigidity and objective truth. We are now free. Free from what, or to do what? The answer follows: "Whatever you want. Just be a good person." To which the response would be, "Whatever I want? Oh, my goodness... that is fabulous! No restrictions. I am going to go and do just that. But you mentioned that I should be good. I thought you said there is no such thing. What does that mean?" "Well, you know, just don't kill anyone." "But isn't that a restriction, I thought you said we were free?" "We are." "Then I'm confused."

Might I posit, at the risk of sounding slightly-looney to the contemporary culture, that our forefathers actually had it right? There is objective truth, good and evil and no matter how much one may like to deny it, a Supreme Being who is the reason we {and this whole world} are even here.

Stay tuned for the coming posts... as I will try to illumine some of the major defects in the new millennial "thinking".

Christmas and Relationships

While sitting at dinner on Sunday evening, my sister, husband and I were perusing the newspaper. Not a typical occurence, but I like to flip through and see if there are good recipes or sales. This past Sunday's paper boasted that they knew what gifts to get your "sweetie". Always up for unique ideas, we started reading. They had 12 ideas, none of them all to unique: watch, cashmere sweater, bracelets, cufflinks, books, blah, blah. In addition to this, there was an article that caught our eye, entitled "Holiday Gift Guide: You like her, she likes you, and that gift better be good". Read here.
Now, what caught my attention, other than it being rather poorly written, was the sheer ridiculousness of it. While I realize that it might be tricky to navigate the waters of what to get your significant other, especially in the beginning phases of the relationship... but I have always been of the opinion that gifts a) come from the heart; b) convey that the other person is treasured; c) are not given to entice a gift in return.
To sum up the article, I feel this line is a true zinger: "I had a really hard time thinking about gift ideas for him. That's when I kind of had to start brainstorming and listening to what he was saying." So, only at Christmas is it important to listen to the man you are dating or married to? Otherwise he is merely around for convenience? The article gets much worse. One man is interviewed, gives his name and confesses that he is casually dating two women, and is not sure if he will get gifts, but might just keep " 'a neutral emergency gift' on hand in case one of them gifts him and he needs to reciprocate." Really? He wrote this in the paper? I am guessing that he is currently not dating anyone and won't need to worry about that "emergency" gift; as I am guessing those women read the article.
As I sat in disbelief as I continued to read, it started to hit me, no wonder our culture is plagued with divorce, affairs, etc. Think about it, if one cannot manage to give a Christmas gift (or birthday gift for that matter) sincerely and honestly, how can one manage to give themself sincerely and honestly? Something to think about and consider...

The Human Experience

On Tuesday night, I had the fortunate experience to watch "The Human
Experience". A movie about two brothers and their friends, who live in a "half-way" house in Brooklyn... and who travel the world in search of the meaning of life. It was one of the most moving films I have ever seen. It brilliantly answered the fundamental questions of human existence: who am I, how did I get here, why am I here, what is the meaning of life, is there anything after this life? These questions are not answered in the expected "documentary" manner; but rather are answered through the movie which evokes a simple experience common to us all - the experience of human life. This film took an in-depth look at our humanity and the human spirit, through the lens of hope and what was produced was a not only an amazingly influential film but also a wake-up call. A call to realize the sanctity of every life... because each life is an irreplaceable and unrepeatable occurence.
I highly recommend seeing this movie. It is only showing in select theatres right now, but they are hoping for wider distribution. For more informtion, check out their website here.

In light of yesterday...

Although, this blog is particularly devoted to the study of Philosophy and Metaphysics, I felt the need to post something truly hopeful. With the election results still ringing in the ears and hearts of Americans, there was a providential message in the daily readings of the Catholic Mass today.

The first reading was taken from the Letter of Paul to the Philipians (2:12-18)
"My beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent, work out your salvation with fear and trembling. For God is the one who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work. Do everything without grumbling or questioning, that you may be blameless and innocent, children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, among whom you shine like lights in the world, as you hold on to the word of life, so that my boast for the day of Christ may be that I did not run in vain or labor in vain. But, even if I am poured out as a libation upon the sacrificial service of your faith, I rejoice and share my joy with all of you. In the same way you also should rejoice and share your joy with me."

The Responsorial Psalm was from Psalm 127: "The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom should I fear? The LORD is my life’s refuge; of whom should I be afraid? "

The Gospel was taken from Luke (14:25-33)
"Great crowds were traveling with Jesus,
and he turned and addressed them,
“If anyone comes to me without hating his father and mother,
wife and children, brothers and sisters,
and even his own life,
he cannot be my disciple.
Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me
cannot be my disciple.
Which of you wishing to construct a tower
does not first sit down and calculate the cost
to see if there is enough for its completion?
Otherwise, after laying the foundation
and finding himself unable to finish the work
the onlookers should laugh at him and say,
‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.’
Or what king marching into battle would not first sit down
and decide whether with ten thousand troops
he can successfully oppose another king
advancing upon him with twenty thousand troops?
But if not, while he is still far away,
he will send a delegation to ask for peace terms.
In the same way,
everyone of you who does not renounce all his possessions
cannot be my disciple.”

The Breakdown:
As St. Paul says: in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, hold on to the Word of LIFE! We are not citizens of this Earth but citizens of the true Kingdom, the one that has no end. As long as you cling to what is truly important, which is the True Messiah, there is nothing to fear.

Is it a coincidence that these are the readings today, I think not!

John Paul II said it throughout his papacy and I feel that it should again be the battlecry: Be Not Afraid! Go out and proclaim the Truth from the Rooftops!