Ronald Dworkin opens his selection with the question, “Do we
have a right to liberty?” As an
American, the knee jerk reaction is “yes” but is this accurate? In order to properly answer these questions,
we need to first define “liberty.”
Isaiah Berlin attempts to define liberty, using “negative”
and “positive” as his qualifiers, where negative liberty means that liberties
are restricted for the good of society and positive liberty is the ability to
be your own master. He explains that
“negative liberty” can be defined with the question, “What is the area within
which the subject – a person or group of persons – is or should be left to do
or be what he is able to do or be, without interference by other persons (p.
389)?” He goes on to explain, “The desire not to be impinged upon, to be left
to oneself, has been the mark of a high civilization on the part of both
individuals and communities (p. 393).”
If we dive a bit deeper, Berlin explains,
“If the liberty of myself or my
class or nation depends on the misery of a number of other human beings, the
system which promotes this is unjust and immoral. But if I curtail or lose my
freedom in order to lessen the shame of such inequality, and do not thereby
materially increase the individual liberty of others, an absolute loss of
liberty occurs (p. 391).”
Berlin argues that, in order to live in a civilized society,
men must give up certain freedoms for the betterment of society. He’s among good company with thinkers such as
Locke, who argued in previous selections that men are good by nature and
require little oversight to create a just society. Locke states, “that being all equal and
independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or
possessions. (p. 51)” and describes liberty as being free from sovereign
oversight or with minimal laws that do not inhibit the personal growth of an
individual.
But as we have learned from other selections, these ideas of
humans being good natured, without the need for a set of laws restricting them,
hinges on the protection of individual liberty. Mill can be quoted as saying, “The great
majority of good actions are intended not for the benefit of the world, but for
that of the individual (p. 335).” Berlin
argues that Mill’s argument that liberty is essential for human growth is
incompatible with history and instead provides a moral dilemma between the need
for individualism in his utilitarian ideal and the creation of laws governing
society. “It is that liberty in this
sense is not incompatible with some kinds of autocracy, or at any rate with the
absence of self-government (p. 393).”
We can see this play out nationally as we respond to the
Covid-19 crisis. Who is deserving of
liberty? What is liberty? Can we measure liberty as described
above? If so, can we decide who is
worthy of what threshold?
---------------------------
Grade: 10/10
Professor Comments: None
No comments:
Post a Comment