Oxford Dictionary defines freedom as, “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint”, but there are multiple issues with this definition. Freedom is not having the right to do as you choose without hindrance because if this was true we would not need police departments or legal systems because nothing would be against the law. Freedom does not come without restraint and restrictions because if it did not, people would wreak havoc and run rampant without end. The Oxford Dictionary definition of freedom may have been true in the past, but in today’s society, it has become the ability to act, speak, or think as one wants within the parameters of what is legally and socially …show more content…
The Social Contract supports this claim the best by stating that we relinquish parts of our freedom to the government for their protection granted that they don’t abuse the trust we give them. This embodies the claim that from the beginning we never had complete and total freedom. A functioning society cannot flourish under total, individual freedom. People would not know what to do with themselves, only acting on impulse and not thinking about the consequences of their actions clearly. Structure is the greatest opponent of freedom; requiring the relinquishment of some freedoms for it to work properly. Basic human instincts are now replaced with civilized ones. Total freedom does not exist in a civilized