Freedom and Responsibility - What is the meaning of these concepts is concluded?Freedom itself is a fairly broad definition of both human capabilities and philosophical canon, which is based far more than a treatise Athenian sages.To be free - so have a precisely to the extent that it allows the possibility to do this or that person.But at the same time it is difficult not to get lost in the definitions, trying to distinguish the characteristics of "freedom from" and "freedom."
first image space is complete anarchy, releasing the animal and the human desire for chaos.The second characteristic, in contrast, implies freedom enshrined in many legal documents.It allows you to enjoy the inalienable rights derived from birth without violating personal space of others.Thus, if the first definition chaotic and does not accept the taxonomy, the second involves a conditional responsibility of the individual for his actions, thoughts and deeds.
But the question now under consideration theme - freedom and responsibility, and thus giving the first definition, it follows from the same and bring the second.Responsibility, in the narrow sense of the word implies limited by law and moral person the opportunity to be responsible for the actions committed.But if the legal characteristic of all more or less clear, then what about morality?Freedom and responsibility in the moral and ethical understanding are inseparable, independent of each other concepts.And, accordingly, they have each person regardless of his capacity, legal capacity and other legal aspects.The moral is - a much wider coverage area of a sphere, not least because, in contrast to the law it considers the person from the inside, giving a full description of all accomplished or not accomplished actions within the capabilities of its identity.
once it becomes clear that the theme of the issue is heterogeneous and ambiguous.After all, freedom and responsibility, giving rise to each other, are mutually exclusive philosophical.
For example, a police officer in pursuit of armed criminals and protect their and others' lives, has the full right to kill him, and thus not beyond the powers conferred upon him by law.
But the same action that the policeman crosses the allowable impact on the freedom of the murdered man, and thus morally even exceeds the boundaries of what is permitted, which allowed him to society.Thus, from the point of view of the same society, the police will be right.If pursued, defense, killing the guard of the law, the company is considered the murder as an aggravating circumstance the murderers and abuse of rights in relation to the victim ...
It should be noted that freedom and responsibility must be inseparable, not only in the framework of the rule of law and conscience.The meaning of these concepts, their correct understanding must be instilled by parents and educational institutions from the birth of man and his development as a person.Otherwise, "to be free" will be his equivalent "to succumb to anarchy," and the responsibility to be a cell that will inevitably lead to deviant behavior of man and will be a threat not only for him but for society as a whole.
