Different perspective of Freedom-----market economy vs social stability

 

What we can define we can control, perhaps this is the reason why we cant define emotion. This article is all about Freedom and its scope.

 

I will define freedom as this  article progresses towards required point.

Pre-requisite:

Cost of Happiness:
happiness is not something static, it’s a dynamic concept and its directly linked to the edge of our freely floating mind. In other words if someone/something is responsible for your happiness(social/sexual/psychological) wont last long until and unless there is some desirable or at least some socially acknowledgeable value is added to the status quo.

Now since this change traces the edge of our freely floating mind (and our mind tend to spread to the extreme extant of our economic/social/psychological reach) it becomes difficult or rather costly to continuously sustain this change. I call it cost of happiness  , that we have to keep paying .

 

Biasness:

Lack of knowledge is called biasness. If you hate a particular religion, relation, government etc then it should be your first priority to gather enough information to refute your own opinion. In case even basic information fails to  contradict your argument then you can treat it as an unbiased argument.(it is possible that you had to dig further to muster required information….reason will in diff article)

 

Conflict of interest:

This is highly complicated. And is a result of highly complicatedly intermingled admixture of above two concept.

Everyone seems to narrate their story as if they are hero in their version of truth. It seems as if we are living in a world of heros(gender neutral notation). But then also , outside the realm of stories this world seems to be very chaotic and tumultuous .

Jains, hindus, muslims etc seems to be praising their  respective religion.

 

ELEPHANT in the Room---The freedom angle:

When you will try to impose responsibility on others which is rationally supported, other side  will  often try to give counter argument which is virtually(only in the realms of their version of story) logical. But simple perusal of their argument will show that outside the realms of their story, they are getting “more ease of life” ; this means the argument that they gave in response of responsibility is just  a parchment protection.

Such person believes in their argument and their hypothetical excuses to evade responsibility. At this juncture you cant make them belief something different . they are sad not bcoz they lack some economic /social/psychological support but because they are trapped in a story whose cost is unaffordable.

It seems that freedom is unfettered exploitation of resources at your ease. …..but this definition again traces edge of freely floating mind …..hence in  future course of time when cost of happiness will increase then it will be an unaffordable situation . this exploitation of resources will enter into the sociological realm yielding exactly opposite results(that wasn’t desirable)

FREEDOM

Then what is freedom?

Freedom is unfettered exploitation of rules that wasn’t designed by you, to keep check the conflict of interest.

This rule based restriction should gradually be ease with time to ensure coast of happiness (or social inflation) is also included . it will  ensure psychological satisfaction.

In this context Rites of Passage becomes important. Will discuss it later first understand by an example.

Suppose we make a rule for a kid that he can watch  only 1 movie that also only in Sunday till he become 14 year old. When he become 14 year old we allowed 3 days a week…………………..simmiliarly when he becomes 21 now he can watch movie any time he wants……………..at this age since in the context of watching movie he is now having no rules along with past experience now he can make rules for younger child (as he has no incentive@conflict of intrest)……….had we allowed that kid to make rules he would have succumbed to market economy/harmones etc. he might have choose 2 days per movie at early age giving some reason on which he believe proving it will increase productivity(which again exists in their story not in real world).Gradual removal of restriction ensures guaranteed cost of happiness along with what wrongs and rights exists in the rule as a part of experience (in future when no rules exists for him ……….he can make better rules).

 

This Big benefits:

There was a time when people use to say “look at my hair its white …...that means I am very experienced respect my opinion”………………now is the time when old people are hiding their white hair by paying to corporate(hair dye).

WHY?:

Earlier people had dream to have and unrestricted social life and this could only be achieved when you grow old. In Pre-British era Panch(judiciary/adjudicator) where old people democratically elected by rest of the old people. The Zamindars (the executive) could be removed very easily by the panch(unlike in British Era…..ironically they are credited to bring a new version of democracy at the cost of 2 world wars ).

But now with the concept of freedom, old people’s authority got diluted and now they started facing lack of freedom even inside the family ,let along in the society .

Ironically this highly marketed freedom(without rule) was to be professed only within family and not in corporate or gov; as professionalism doesn't go with unrestricted freedom (and these professionals embrace restriction in an unimaginably illogically imposed on them just to sustain market economy; the same market economy which vouches for unrestricted freedom and personal choice in social world).

This marketed freedom has only served corporate world at the cost of social/psychological stability. ..individual now can ignore their relatives and enjoy the world bcoz they have no  rules of sticking to family (bcoz you are modern and can enjoy freedom) and not enough money and means to take entire section of traditional family…………………….now imagine if there was restriction then what could be impact on balance sheet of big corporate/gov promoting their version of freedom(remember conflict of intrest)  and the impact on society.

 

Homo Sapeins are  first social animal to vouch for individual freedom ……………..am I wrong ?………..yes definitely bcoz its not homo sapiens its market economy that’s tearing apart everything, disguising as homo sapiens………….I am a homo sapiens(sapiens) and I reject this version of FREEDOM.