Freedom of choice is ... Freedom of choice: examples

In many cultures there is the most common concept of man. This standard image is the standard for many adherents of a particular culture. However, it should be noted that there is a large number of theories about what all the same distinguishes a person from all the diversity of living beings on the planet Earth. From a biological point of view, only a person has a consciousness that allows him to look at the world around in a completely different way. But does consciousness only make us all key figures in the game for survival on the planet? Representatives of religious beliefs believe that God makes man a man. After all, only people can pray and directly realize the plan of God. Although in the theories presented there is a rational grain, they do not fully illuminate the reality. In addition to the fact that a person is aware of himself, he is, above all, a social being. This means that it does not simply coexist with other representatives of its kind, but also closely interacts with them. Thus, all people are given the opportunity to decide what they want to be, choose specific social groups or create their own. All the facts presented indicate the existence of such a feature as freedom of choice, which will be discussed later in the article.

free will

There are several different terms that in principle characterize the same phenomenon, but from different perspectives. It follows that freedom of the will is the ability of any person, due to his consciousness, to make a choice depending on the specific circumstances that have developed. However, it should be noted that the term described above characterizes a philosophical category, which is nothing but a type of freedom of choice.

Two approaches to the vision of free will

In philosophy, there are two basic approaches to the consideration of free will. The former is called metaphysical liberalism. It testifies to the person's freedom of will because of the infidelity of the assertion that determinism is true. In other words, the adherents of this approach support the view that a person is free to make a choice on his own. The second approach says that determinism is wrong. Thus, free will simply does not exist. It should be noted: the second approach is fundamentally wrong, if in addition to purely philosophical views focus on other indicators. After all, man, in fact, is not constrained by a rigid natural framework, unlike animals. The simplest example is the presence in the animal world of the food chain and its absence in the human environment.

What is freedom of choice?

Freedom of choice is, in fact, the same thing as free will, but the first term is used not in philosophy, but in jurisprudence. As history shows, for many centuries people were deprived of the opportunity to personally choose for themselves something. And only in the middle of the XX century it was decided that human rights are the main priority. Thus, since that time the freedom of choice is not just a term, but a principle of realizing people's rights and freedoms. Hence it follows that this definition must be viewed through the prism of law.

Freedom of choice in jurisprudence

Practically all over the world at the level of legislation there are normative acts that fix the principle of freedom of choice and create conditions for its direct implementation. In this article, the author will consider this principle through the prism of the national legal traditions of the Russian Federation. Given the current trend of democracy in Russia, freedom of choice is the personal, free right of every person to fully utilize their powers, as well as the resources that they possess, such as money. There are several basic examples of the manifestation of the principle of freedom of choice, namely:

- the right of the employee to choose the place and type of labor;

- the consumer's right to spend his available money to meet his own needs;

Thus, the freedom of choice, the examples of which are presented above, is to a greater extent the totality of the powers that a person can exercise.

Constitutional consolidation of the principle

It should be remembered that Chapter 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes a number of fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen. One of these is the right to freedom of choice. But there is one quite interesting fact. Directly defining the right to freedom of choice does not exist in the Constitution. It is a cumulative concept that determines the ability of a person to exercise his constitutional rights. An example is Chapter 2 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which establishes different powers, namely:

1. The right to life (art.20).
2. The right to liberty and security of person (art. 22).
3. Right to privacy (art. 23).
4. The right to freedom of religion (art. 28), etc.

As we understand, constitutional law is fundamental in its essence, therefore, it is simply useless to prescribe the principle of freedom of choice, because it embodies all those powers that the Constitution of the Russian Federation gives to every citizen and person.

The problem of freedom of choice

To date, many lawyers are thinking about the meaning of freedom of choice. There are many theories about this. In one of them it is said that the freedom of choice is an immediate opportunity for a person to act within the framework that is prescribed by the current legislation of Russia and the constitution. On the other hand, a person is free to choose not only within the framework of formalized official norms, but also to focus on his own moral principles. Thus, it remains unclear whether the laws should be a priority in the process of direct choice, or is it purely personal power? Most likely, people are given the opportunity to choose themselves, but any solution should be within the legal regime that exists in Russia.

Freedom, choice, responsibility

Equally important is the question of the relationship between freedom of choice and responsibility. The fact is that the Russian Constitution as it fixes the principle described in the article to the full. In fact, a person can do whatever he wants. But some social relations, morality and other factors do not allow people to carry out absolutely all their ideas. For example, a person wants to commit an offense. In fact, he makes his choice. But for him, he will incur the statutory responsibility. From a legal point of view, any actions that go beyond the legal field should be punished if they are negative. But from the position of common sense, a person is actually responsible for the choice he made. Thus, freedom of choice is a dual category that exists both in the legal and philosophical field.

The solution of the problem of the ratio of freedom of choice and responsibility, many lawyers see in the moral foundations of society. After all, as already indicated earlier, a person is, above all, a social being. Therefore, in the process of interaction with other individuals, he must obey the generally established rules, not observing which any of us will become like an animal.

Violation of freedom of choice

Very often the state, which should be the de facto guarantor of ensuring human rights and freedoms, violates all the principles of this sphere. In this case, we are talking about specific political regimes that come to power in a particular state, for more convenient control over people. As the practice of many centuries shows, such anti-democratic regimes almost always infringe upon the rights of people. In fact, there is virtually no freedom of choice for the population of such countries. Because any manifestations of the initiative are punished, since people must live exclusively in a deliberately created framework. In such countries, as a rule, there are "dead" constitutions. Because totalitarian power understands that constitutional law is fundamental in its essence. With strict observance of constitutional norms, it is impossible to oppress the population in any way.

It should be noted: such regimes of total control do not bring anything good for the state, and for residents on its territory. Although at the first stages of the organization of a new country, rigid frames are simply necessary, because without them it is impossible to achieve the desired effect.

Summing up

In conclusion, it must be said that freedom of choice actually makes us all human. Therefore, do not neglect this opportunity, but, on the contrary, try to use it constantly, in all key life situations.