>>11780005IMO that definition of freedom makes freedom hard to achieve. Also nonexistence can't really qualify as this true freedom anyways since it only frees someone psychologically i.e, they are not chained to any choices because of mental burdens, but this is a result of them not being capable of thinking in the first place. You can't call it freedom, its more of an abstinence from the matter entirely.
I like to think that there are 3 types of freedom, physical, psychological and political. The only being that can be completely liberated in these three fields yet still is capable of making choices and undertaking actions that affect the surrounding world through those actions would be a god. But even then god, or at least the idea of him, is still limited in a sense through the fact that he still has an obligation to humanity as its creator, thus not being entirely unlimited in choice despite being omnipotent and all powerful. I suppose in this model restrictions on freedom come as a result of reason. "I have done x, so I must/mustn't do y due to the results of x." Freedom is wavered and regained in a reciprocal process started by our impositions on the world, and the reactive impositions placed on us as a result. I guess you could say that if you were born a nigger or a dog or something and your consciousness and reasoning themselves were limited, then you would be restricted in choice as well, but since a lower consciousness evidently can't comprehend higher consciousness thought there is no real reason for them to worry of such things anyways since they can't imagine them and will return to regular actions unbothered. For us their consciousness may look like a puddle, but for them its still a sea very well competent and capable for processing the world. Some 4th dimension consciousness is probably looking at me right now and saying "wow, what a pseud retard writing that post" but im unbothered because i cant comprehend their higher consciousness anyways.
