Refine
Language
Document Type
- Articles (138)
- Dissertations (44)
- Books (12)
- Reviews (7)
- Collections (5)
Has Fulltext
- no (206) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2014 (206) (remove)
It has been over 70 years since Erich Fromm wrote >Escape from Freedom<. He defined two type of freedom: FREEDOM FROM (negative) and FREEDOM TO (positive). Fromm's masterpiece, however, does not measure the two types of freedom, and this is not surprising – there were no freedom data at the time. Now, there are plenty of data, and Fromm's concepts of freedom can be operationalized across countries. The two types of freedom, positive and negative, correlate at below 0.5, and such low correlation is surprising – I discuss outliers and point out that freedom is an end in itself, as recognized, for instance, by Amartya Sen. Furthermore, while we acknowledge the importance of FREEDOM FROM, we forget that FREEDOM FROM is not fully realized without FREEDOM TO: it's great to be free; but it's even better to feel free as well.
弗洛姆对>积极自由<与>消极自由<的区分,具有着重要的伦理与政治意义。其自由概念的实质是通过人的本质力量的发展来反对外在权威,提倡通过人自身发展与社会条件的改善实现真正的自由,孜孜以求人的自由发展。伯林的自由概念的实质则是阻止权威的入侵,摆脱任何形式的束缚,体现对最低限度的个人自由不可侵犯的神圣信仰。伯林在《自由论》中对弗洛姆的>积极自由<进行了批判,他认为>积极自由<最终会走向自由的反面,导致人自由的丧失,而只有>消极自由<才能确保人的自由和权利。弗洛姆从人的发展与潜能实现的角度认为,>积极自由<在逻辑上已包含了>消极自由<,>消极自由>是实现>积极自由<的必要条件,但只有>积极自由<才能保障人之自由的全面实现。这是弗洛姆对伯林等西方自由主义的最好回应。弗洛姆的>积极自由<更符合人的本性,更能代表人类发展的趋势和要求。