Page 14 - GALIET FREEDOM: Kant and Rousseau IV

society: “now in some affairs which affect the interests of the commonwealth, we require a certain mechanism whereby some members of the commonwealth must behave purely passively so, that they may, by an artificial common agreement...” (Kant: 56). Kant also adds that “it is, of course, impermissible to argue in such cases; obedience is imperative” (Kant: 56). For both Kant and Rousseau, freedom means entering into a social contract that restricts freedom to ensure public safety and security and to protect the interests of Rousseau’s “general will” and Kant’s “commonwealth.”
Now, back to Kant’s freedom: transcendence and noumenism where our minds do not constitute and determine reality. For Kant free.d/om is in-tellect, in-reason, in-thought (moral). Is there freedom in th.in.king? Kant and Rousseau: convention and nature. Prison versus freedom. Kant and Rousseau: thesis versus antithesis. Boundary versus boundless. th.in.gs (as they are) versus Th.in.gs (as they are not).
• 14 •