Is absolute freedom a good thing if in the process of its outworking it leads you into your own, or indeed others, demise or harm?
If you have absolute freedom there are choices to make; to do good or to do evil or to do nothing; to choose life or death; to create or destroy; to show compassion or indifference or malice.
The use of freedom has both positive and negative consequences based on the decisions made. if I choose to walk one path I cannot simultaneously walk another. The choice is always to the exclusion of the other and due to the constant of time it is always a one way path. (It may have options later to change the path).
Understand that freedom can lead to destructive consequences, the question needs to be asked do we want this absolute freedom? Or, do we only want a limited freedom with defined boundaries defined for us? If the later is the case who should define those boundaries? Who defines what harm is?
We say we want to be free, but do we really if it means we, or others, can be harmed in the process?
If we want freedom for ourselves we must allow others to be free also, but the consequences of your freedom may have an effect on limiting the freedom of others.
The concept of freedom is appealing to all, but the application of that freedom in our fallible and human world is full of complications that ego, no matter how good intended, will always desire more for one to the detriment of another.
Freedom is self-limiting and laws of the universe do have an effect. I cannot go left and right at the same time (and live), I cannot under my own power break the law of gravity, I cannot travel through time to change past decisions.
So what is and how do we deal with this freedom that all of us from time to time say or demand we must have?
Paul S Allen