Today, people live free from many shackles, natural disasters, poverty and famine, various diseases, superstitions, and the oppression of tyrants compared to previous generations. The recent emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) and the rapidly growing technologies of transportation and communication have broken down even the barriers of time and space that have restricted humans. In this way, we enjoy conveniences and live freely in a completely new world compared to the past.
When looking at the aspect of the inherent human right that all humans should enjoy without discrimination, that is, the ‘right to freedom,’ we can see that significant historical progress has been made today. However, do people truly feel happy as much as they feel free?
The emergence of the tendency to absolutize freedom and criticism of it, St. Thomas Aquinas, in opposition to determinism, clearly stated that humans have freedom.
Furthermore, modern thinkers such as J. P. Sartre presented notable reflections emphasizing the freedom and responsibility of humans who devote themselves to the future. However, some scholars have emphasized human freedom so much that they have moved toward absolutizing ‘indeterminism’ without acknowledging any kind of constraint on freedom. In other words, since humans are beings who complete themselves in freedom, they argued that a higher power, such as God, that can restrict human freedom should not be acknowledged.
However, this position of acknowledging infinite freedom for humans has been met with much criticism. Humans are primarily limited by their dependence on the world, society, and history. Humans are also limited not only by external factors but also by their passions and psychological pressures. In reality, only a tiny number of people can confidently say that they are genuinely free, and even fewer are happy.
Humans constantly pursue freedom, but when they do, they feel ‘anxiety’ or ‘loneliness’, and sometimes, unable to bear the psychological weight, they want to escape. To overcome this dilemma, we must note that human freedom is not a simple idea, but a complex one. For example, St. Thomas Aquinas, while acknowledging that the will’s tendency toward good is inevitable, distinguished three cases in which the will can act freely.
Freedom of execution (Exercitii) refers to the ability of the will to perform or not perform its own acts of will, that is, to desire or not to desire. Freedom of specification (Specificationis) is the ability to choose this and nothing else. And freedom of opposition (Contrarietatis) is the ability to choose good, not evil.
‘Freedom of execution’ is entirely at the discretion of the will, but ‘freedom of specification’ can be enjoyed more freely the more one possesses values such as power, honor, and wealth, and it can be enjoyed when one is not hindered externally. However, is it possible to move beyond the ‘negative freedom’ that Erich Fromm called ‘Liberty from~’, that is, the state of being free from relationships, compulsion, restraint, and interference, and move toward ‘Liberty for~’?
However, in terms of the ‘opposite freedom’ of avoiding evil and choosing good, the aspect of ‘positive freedom’ that allows one to act autonomously with a clear goal is revealed. However, it is very questionable whether freedom can be considered to have improved in this aspect today. Today, people feel they are free only on the surface, and in reality, they are not free, and in some aspects, they seem to be regressing. This is because they are obsessed with external success, leading to the prevalence of selfishness and hedonism, and the contempt for sacrifice, moderation, justice, and consideration for neighbors.
Human freedom is the freedom to choose while being restricted by specific and historical circumstances. However, we humans can choose one of various values, but we cannot ultimately define the value itself. Humans must say, “I do this because it is good,” but cannot claim, “It is good because I do it,” and the standard of that value does not lie with the subject of the action.
“The truth will set you free.” (John 8:32) If human will determines what is bad, this instead means a defect in freedom. Immoral decisions, although they formally have the appearance of freedom, are neither freedom nor a part of freedom. The choices that many modern people indulge in, such as gambling and drugs, only leave behind the lack of freedom that is addiction. Humans must constantly choose between good and evil objects, and either the direction that matures or suppresses their freedom. If immoral desires diminish the freedom of the will, the more firmly the will is directed toward good, the greater the freedom will be.
