Our World Religions teacher told the class this quote once, in reference to doing harm unto others, when she used bullying as an example of freedom of expression exercised by bullies and their "freedom would end if the bullied would exercise his/her freedom to take action against them."
However, I simply think this does not apply in all cases.
If you were free to run a business, and a competitor opens its own firm as it is free to do so, does that necessarily stop you from running your business just because another firm begins to do the same thing?
I am interested in your viewpoints.
Yes. I believe that my freedom ends when others' freedom begins.
No. I believe that my freedom does not end when others' freedom begins.
It depends on the situation.
Select gender and age to cast your vote:
Please select your age
Do you believe that your freedom ends when others' freedom begins?
It's kind of a valid point, but it's oversimplified. It's very common for the rights of one person to conflict with the rights of another. In those cases you have to weigh the rights of one person against the other's, and come up with a solution.
Your teacher's example was pretty bad. A better example might be freedom of speech. A person has the right to free speech. But what if they decide to make their speech in a residential area at 2:00AM on a Tuesday morning, blasting it though 1000 watt amplifiers? People have a right to sleep. So one person's right conflicts with another's.
So how do you resolve this? It's not possible for both parties to have unlimited rights with no conditions attached. So, as a society we come up with rules with some sort of compromise. The person can make their speech, but not loudly at 2:00AM. The person can sleep at 2:00AM, but can't expect the same kind of quiet at noon. They can't expect their neighbors to not mow their lawn or use a chainsaw during the day.
So let's say you have a business. And for whatever reason your business crushes another bussiness. In that regard your professor is correct your 'freedom to run the business' did affect his freedom.
But that's simply how the universe works. For every force there is an opposing force. It is impossible to not do harm to others. Even by just existing you are doing harm to the germs in the body. That computer you used to type this. If you bought it from apple you hurt apple's competitors. When you get hired at a job that means that other people who wanted the job couldn't get it. Let's say you get a nice boyfriend, than someone see's you walking down the street with them, and that person is single so they feel ressentful and bitter. In fact just being happy and successful can make other people feel resentful.
So trying not to hurt other people is a stupid idea. Because every action we do hurts something in some way. Your teacher is a faggot that is out of touch with reality.
This is extremely hard to answer.. because there's multiple things that this applies to.. and lots of things contradict each other... so I ended up deciding that it varies and depends on the situation.
For example, a way that my freedom could end and another's could begin is if I wanted to watch a movie.. but I didn't buy the tickets in time.. my freedom to watch that movie has ended (albeit somewhat temporarily as I could go and buy the ticket someplace else or wait another day).. but for the person who bought it, their freedom has begun. Or the exact opposite! So it's something that's pretty interesting to think about. It also depends on what one considers the meaning of "freedom" to be.. as I think that most people have a slightly different meaning for the word. Nevertheless! A very interesting question! :)
The quote is true in all cases, and it's even true in the context of opening a new business. Cuz u're surely not preventing the other person from owning the same type of business, nor are you in any way trying to shut their business down. You're simply a competitor. Just in case you try to harm your competitor or play dirty (taking action against them), your freedom ends there.
I think that’s a weird quote.. I immediately thought about social issues when reading it, like female freedom in non-western countries, or being gay anywhere. Does your freedom end because theirs begins? No. That would be a very toxic thing to think.
Well in the case of businesses, you're right theoretically, but pragmatically it is the case that corporations tend to conglomerate out of interest for a higher profit, which results in a lot of politicians taking bribes to doing favors for them legislatively in the capacity of regulations that hurt their competitors.
That once may have been true about freedom to do businesses.
In general, I think it depends on what freedoms we're trying to achieve. I think freedom of speech supercedes anybody elses freedom to silence those who offend them. For their freedom is an act done against another & exists as an implication to a series of 'corrections' people make to those who would by simply running their mouth commit 'speech violations'. I reject that freedom should have to be percieved as a zero-sum game.
If a freedom is being exercised to do harm to another, then yes, one freedom ends when another begins. However there are few freedoms that can harm another. The freedom of expression does not protect harmful speech, such that can actually incite or cause to be enacted violence or a reaction the elicits physical harm so it's hard to see that as a protected freedom. I don't think this is generally the case however. The freedoms of two people don't necessarily intersect but co-exist parallel to each other.
In a way yes. That Supreme Court bloke apparently said "your liberty to swing your fists ends just where my nose begins". It essentially comes down to that there is a boundary of the individual's freedom, that begins when you bestow a limit to somebody else's freedom. It's the fundamental basics of the limitation of free speech here, so it applies there. At least depending on the perspective of the individual.
As for it applying to all cases, no it probably doesn't. If I were in the USA and I yell some stuff that others may find offensive, I don't infringe the freedom of others to respond/leave or whatsoever. So in a way your freedom doesn't end even though they have freedom to do certain things.
Freedom is the most precious treasure that human beings have. It is our responsibility to respect it, enjoy it, and prevent anyone from stealing it from us. We all have the right to keep it and take care of it. So then, how dare you even think that you have the right to take even the slightest ounce of freedom from your neighbor? If you enjoy your own, it can never be at the cost of your neighbor’s. You can be yourself and enjoy your life, but you will never be able to tell me how I have to be, what group I have to belong to, or what I need to think.
Although I cheated and stole other guys' girlfriends away from them...
But if we put love and war aside (because all's fair in love and war, lol), I'd say I am a pretty fair guy, as I din't "steal" other girls away from their boyfriends just for a fuck&dump. In most cases, I didn't even had an idea if they're with somebody or not.
I would argue that one's freedom always ends where another's begins, simply because it is necessary for society to exist (while I often don't agree with Hobbes he wasn't entirely wrong). I also believe that the state is then a necessary entity to ensure that one does not violate another's freedom.
That quote's meaning is a derivative from a wiser and more eloquent understanding of 'freedom', which goes:
Your freedom is my responsibility, and my freedom is your responsibility.
Perfectly reasonable, isn't it?
In love, we don't where we end and the other person begins. The quote you're mentioning is really saying that your individual freedom depends on my being free, and vice versa.
The exploitation interpretation of it is only one facet. You're right to be suspicious.
I think it is good that you have the nerve and the confidence to question what your teachers tell you. That’s what learning is all about. So, did you present your hypothetical to your teacher and ask if her statement would stand in that situation? Sometimes when we try to teach people things will use examples that are just examples and do not apply in every single situation there will always be exceptions and I’m sure you know that.
It depends on the situation. If others' goals cross my goals then it will lead to conflict but in situations when people have different goals and things they need to do to achieve those goals are different then there won't be any problem and everyone's freedom will be intact.
Your analogy isn’t exactly accurate, a better way to look at is your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.
In your example of the two businesses, them opening doesn’t necessarily harm you. Unless they are damaging your reputation without justification (like saying you put rat meat in your burgers, for example). Competition isn’t trampling anyone’s rights.
Your teacher is right. Crime for instance is free until there is adversity for your criminal behavior. You want to steal this, I don't want you stealing this, Freedom to steal is now met with the freedom to stop you from stealing. Think of freedom as the "object" in Newtons first law of motion. So unless the "object" is unstoppable...
two completely different scenarios the first one is taking control itself and not allowing to be treated and such Manor the second what is friendly competition and how much drive and wisdom you have to succeed
your freedom doesn't necessary end. It is reduced because then you will not have the freedom to oppress others and that will make you feel pissed. for example, in the issues of slavery and immigration, white people's freedom doesn't end when black people have freedom and American people's freedom doesn't end when immigrants are free to open businesses.
I think your teacher is partially right. Some freedoms does stifles on someone else's freedom at some point. I think there should be some stipulations on some freedoms because some people would abuse those freedoms
11.2K opinions shared on Society & Politics topic.
My freedom doesn't end where another group/person's freedom to control me begins. Even if this control is mentioned in the Quran, the Bible or the Veddah.
in your example, competition does not directly infringe upon the first persons ability to run a business. the more appropriate example would be someone going in to the shop and trashing it, or fighting customers, or just generally being a nuisance. then they are infringing on the rights of the first person to earn a living to secure food and drink.
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions