Comments? (I'm still early at writing.)
People too often believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized
Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which we might think that liberty is maximized when obligations are not minimized. Discuss what you think determines whether or not we believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized.
Essay (written in 30 minutes. Mistakes have been preserved):
An individual having liberty is considered to have the full capacity and freedom of choice to voluntarily pursue tasks he/she is interested in. Understandably, this demands that obligations be eliminated in order to maximize the freedom of choice, and consequently liberty. Throughout the 21st century, it has become apparent to me that society has been strongly striving towards increased liberty and decreased obligations. This is evident by the rise of numerous political movements that strive towards liberty; some do so extremely as is the case of Anarchists, but most do so moderately as seen in the most popular political party in the United States of America: the Liberals. Anarchists believe and state that every person should have complete autonomy and liberty, and should not be restricted by the regulations of society, including the government.
The Liberals, however, take a more balanced and well-thoughtout approach by stating that although a citizen's liberty and autonomy should be maximized, there are important obligations by which all citizens must abide in order to secure each other's liberties. These laws would prevent one citizen from misusing his or her own liberty to oppress that of another citizen such that maximum liberty could be achieved for all members of society, particulatly discrimination-susceptible minorities. An example where one person's liberty could reduce that of another if not regulated by obligations is the case of discrimination and the silencing of the voices of others. Those actions, although unacceptable and immoral, are consistent with a person maximizing his or her own liberty to perform whatever actions he or she desires. However, silencing the voices of others violates their liberty, and thus the liberty of society as a whole. This could be seen in the case of dictatorships where public speech against the ruling power is deterred by powerful punishments, including the death penalty at times. Thus, society as a whole cannot maximize its liberty if the liberty of discrimination is allowed. Consequently, liberty cannot be maximized by minimizing obligations as it does in fact require certain key restrictions, although that may seem paradoxical at first.
In conclusion, although one might at first think that minimizing obligations as much as possible would increase liberty, just as the Anarchists believe, the fact is that such a goal requires a more complicated solution. This is because in a society, true liberty cannot exist without a certain restriction on itself. Thus, it seems that for a society or group to achieve maximum liberty, certain obligations must be put in place to ensure that one person's liberty does not in fact violate the liberty of another, and thus the liberty of society as a whole. However, it can be deduced that if a person is living in an individual setting or is far more superior to the rest of society, and the maximization of only that person's liberty is sought after, then obligations can virtually be eliminated as his or her own liberty is not threatened by that of another person.
People too often believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized
Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which we might think that liberty is maximized when obligations are not minimized. Discuss what you think determines whether or not we believe that liberty is maximized when obligations are minimized.
Essay (written in 30 minutes. Mistakes have been preserved):
An individual having liberty is considered to have the full capacity and freedom of choice to voluntarily pursue tasks he/she is interested in. Understandably, this demands that obligations be eliminated in order to maximize the freedom of choice, and consequently liberty. Throughout the 21st century, it has become apparent to me that society has been strongly striving towards increased liberty and decreased obligations. This is evident by the rise of numerous political movements that strive towards liberty; some do so extremely as is the case of Anarchists, but most do so moderately as seen in the most popular political party in the United States of America: the Liberals. Anarchists believe and state that every person should have complete autonomy and liberty, and should not be restricted by the regulations of society, including the government.
The Liberals, however, take a more balanced and well-thoughtout approach by stating that although a citizen's liberty and autonomy should be maximized, there are important obligations by which all citizens must abide in order to secure each other's liberties. These laws would prevent one citizen from misusing his or her own liberty to oppress that of another citizen such that maximum liberty could be achieved for all members of society, particulatly discrimination-susceptible minorities. An example where one person's liberty could reduce that of another if not regulated by obligations is the case of discrimination and the silencing of the voices of others. Those actions, although unacceptable and immoral, are consistent with a person maximizing his or her own liberty to perform whatever actions he or she desires. However, silencing the voices of others violates their liberty, and thus the liberty of society as a whole. This could be seen in the case of dictatorships where public speech against the ruling power is deterred by powerful punishments, including the death penalty at times. Thus, society as a whole cannot maximize its liberty if the liberty of discrimination is allowed. Consequently, liberty cannot be maximized by minimizing obligations as it does in fact require certain key restrictions, although that may seem paradoxical at first.
In conclusion, although one might at first think that minimizing obligations as much as possible would increase liberty, just as the Anarchists believe, the fact is that such a goal requires a more complicated solution. This is because in a society, true liberty cannot exist without a certain restriction on itself. Thus, it seems that for a society or group to achieve maximum liberty, certain obligations must be put in place to ensure that one person's liberty does not in fact violate the liberty of another, and thus the liberty of society as a whole. However, it can be deduced that if a person is living in an individual setting or is far more superior to the rest of society, and the maximization of only that person's liberty is sought after, then obligations can virtually be eliminated as his or her own liberty is not threatened by that of another person.
