freedom is my identity essay

University of Notre Dame

Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

• Home ›
• Reviews ›

Identities and Freedom: Feminist Theory Between Power and Connection

Allison Weir, Identities and Freedom: Feminist Theory Between Power and Connection , Oxford University Press, 2013, 176pp., $24.95 (pbk), ISBN 9780199936885.

Reviewed by Sonia Kruks, Oberlin College

Questions concerning the nature of identity and the desirability, or otherwise, of identity politics have long been topics of passionate debate among feminist theorists and philosophers. In this wide-ranging and critical engagement with the now voluminous scholarship on these matters, Allison Weir seeks to re-affirm the positive value for feminism of certain forms of identity politics: those in which various kinds of what she calls "identification-with" play a key role. She aims to rebut a recent and influential body of work that considers "identities" to be oppressive operations of power that ubiquitously constitute subjects by locating them within such categories as "women." Against such claims Weir wants to develop an account of how freedom arises in affirming identities and in making connections through them. "In particular," she writes, "I want to argue that the dimension of identity as identification-with has been the liberatory dimension of identity politics, and that this dimension has been overshadowed and displaced by a focus on identity as category" (62-3).

Weir develops her arguments through a method of extended and critical exegesis. Each chapter engages with one or more authors, first to parse out what Weir sees as valuable in their thinking and then to move "beyond" it in order to develop her own claims. As such, the book provides an incisive survey of a large body of feminist and other work on questions of identity, ranging from early and what are now "classic" essays on identity politics from the 1980's to recent works by Linda Zerilli and Saba Mahmood. Weir's wide-ranging and accessible overview of the literature will be useful for feminist philosophy classes, while her critiques and provocative arguments will provide food for thought for many feminist scholars, as well as for those concerned with questions of identity, subjectivity, agency, freedom, and so forth. Because the book considers so many thinkers and discusses such a variety of theoretical positions my treatment of it must be somewhat selective; other readers will surely discover further matters of great interest within its pages.

Weir begins the Introduction with the dramatic, but I think exaggerated, claim that "the spectre of the prison hangs over  any  affirmation of identity in contemporary social and political philosophy, as in social and political life" (1; my emphasis). Identity, she claims, is conceived as oppression, as "entrapment" and thus it is always cast as antithetical to freedom. Discussing Butler at some length, Weir argues that the apparent "paradox" of identity with which Butler and others grapple -- that it is through subjection that one becomes a subject, so that what one wishes to contest is what one is -- depends on conceptions of identity and freedom that are both overly narrow and misguidedly regarded as opposed to each other. By thinking, instead, of identities as meaningful, chosen, and relational, we may bring into being other notions of freedom, ones that do not align freedom with liberal conceptions of the self as a sovereign agent and so as antithetical to social identity. Such notions, instead, emphasize forms of connection and belonging. Here, "freedom," "identification-with," "connection," and "transformative identities" are implicated in each other.

Weir skillfully expands on her central claims in Chapter 1, "Who Are We? Modern Identities Between Taylor and Foucault." She draws from the early and middle-period work of Foucault the "suspicion" of identity as power-laden subjection and from Charles Taylor the apparently opposed "faith" that our identities may be "authentic" and meaningful. She argues that each position is too one-sided but they may be creatively brought together. If we conceive of freedom as a social practice through which, in connection with others, critique and resistance to dominant social constructions of the self become possible, then we open up possibilities for new, "transformative identities" to be created. Taylor is correct, she argues, that the answer to the question "Who am I?" is not about my location in social categories but is rather about my meaningful connections. However, these connections are more deeply social than Taylor himself acknowledges: "My freedom, then, must be social freedom: must be situated in my social connections" (37).

Weor further engages the question of "connections" in Chapter 2, "Home and Identity." The chapter, subtitled "In Memory of Iris Marion Young," centers around discussion of Young's "House and Home: Feminist Variations on a Theme" (1997). Via Young, Weir also revisits early feminist critiques of "home" as an exclusionary notion founded on (primarily white) privilege and on the "policing of borders" (45). Critics such as Bernice Johnson Reagon, Minnnie Bruce Pratt, Biddy Martin, Chandra Talpade Mohanty, and others had argued that privileged, mainly white, feminists sought "sisterhood" and a comfortable "home" in the feminist movement by excluding others who were not like them. [1]  Young argued that, the validity of these criticisms notwithstanding, there are ways that "home" also denotes a domain of experience that is necessary for all human flourishing. Feminists, she accordingly urged, should not reject the value of home, but rather should demand that its benefits -- a space of personal meaning, security, and needed privacy -- be available for all and not only for the privileged few. Weir rehearses the early critiques of the dangers of "home" with some sympathy. She then discusses Young's response to them and argues that we should move beyond for-and-against arguments in order to view "home" as a locus of values that transcend such dichotomies. "Home," Weir argues, may be a site for connections in which we both accept the risks of conflict and where we may, in freedom, expand the self in "loving" relationships: " freedom is precisely the capacity to be in relationships that one desires: to love whom and what you choose to love " (57; Weir's emphasis). She argues that in creating such new political "homes" for ourselves within movements of "feminist solidarity" we also engage in creating new forms of "transformative identification with ideals, with each other, and with a feminist 'we'" (61).

As a reading of Young's essay, I think Weir's account misses its main point. Young does not see "home" as a place either of risk or of comfortable security within movements of "feminist solidarity" (although it may provide a needed anchor-point from whence to set forth into political movements). Instead, Young begins from the Heideggerian notion that "dwelling" is the human way of being in the world. We dwell in the world as embodied existences, and Young argues that "home is an extension of a person's body." Indeed, it is so integral to the self, she writes, that "a person without a home is quite literally deprived of individual existence." [2]  Thus it is, above all, as a locus of personal existential meaning that Young defends the necessity of "home" against its feminist critics. The space of "home" is  literally  the personal, indeed private, place within which one most immediately dwells. Accordingly, it must lose its very meaning if it expanded, as Weir endeavors, to include making a "home" within identity politics (50). Even so, this chapter offers important insights into the kinds of connections that a transformative identity politics might require, and these are further extended in the next chapter.

Titled "Global Feminism and Transformative Identity Politics," chapter 3 focuses more fully on the notion of identity politics as an active "identification-with" through which, in self-critical reflection and in connection with others (including others who are different from "ourselves"), new and better feminist identities might be created. Again protesting against notions of identity that reduce "women" to merely an objective category, Weir argues that it is through our commitments and solidarities that we actively construct our identities as transformative. Here, Weir sets out the three kinds of "identification-with" that she thinks are necessary for feminism: with feminist "values and ideals;" with "ourselves" as a feminist "we;" and with particular others, including with strangers (68). Such identifications must, moreover, take place "across power divides" (79) and Weir turns to Maria Lugones's vision of empathetic "'world'-traveling" to flesh out this possibility. [3]

I greatly appreciate Weir's insistence that identities are not static givens and that they may be transformed through critical and collective practices. However, in this chapter and elsewhere, she often affirms the self-creating and freedom-affirming aspects of identity at the expense of acknowledging the very real constraints that unchosen ascriptions of identity inflict on many. In addition, Weir's invocations of "identification-with" need better to be unpacked conceptually. For "identification-with" ideals, or with a political collectivity, or with specific persons are surely quite distinct experiences. It is often unclear whether or when Weir is using the concept of identification primarily in a psychological vein (for example in its classic Freudian sense of libidinal attachment), [4]  or as an affective orientation, or in a more phenomenological vein as a lived experience, or as designating a moral project that feminists ought to undertake through rational self-critique. A more thorough treatment of how intellect, embodied affect, emotion, and eroticism may, variously, sustain these diverse kinds of "identification-with" would better support her claims. [5]

Chapter 4, "Transforming Women," further elaborates Weir's critique of conceptions of women's identity as "entrapment." The heart of the chapter is an extended, critical exegesis of Linda Zerilli's, Feminism and the Abyss of Freedom . [6]  Weir applauds Zerilli for emphasizing collective feminist practices as practices of freedom, but she is critical of Zerilli's Arendtian project of fully extricating such practices from the quagmire of identity debates. Re-evaluating Zerilli's discussion of the Milan Women's Collective, Weir argues that the practices of the Milan feminists do not, contra Zerilli's reading, supercede women's identity but rather transform it. Hannah Arendt's distinction, on which Zerilli builds, between "who" a person is ("the 'unique disclosure of human action'") and "what" they are ("identity, or substance") sets up a false opposition (104). Against this, Weir argues that "these acts of freedom are re-creating our identities as women -- are changing what and who women are" (105). Weir points out that there are serious costs attached to Zerilli's attempt to go beyond the identity, "women." For it is not only that this identity is, in part, constitutive of "who" we are but also that it has a positive liberatory potential. Referring to "the early radical lesbian feminist figure of the women-identified woman", a figure which she says "has been all but erased from our memory" (100), Weir argues that it points toward an ideal of freedom through identification with other women that we should continue to value. I am not as convinced as Weir that the identity, "women," has, in fact, become as devoid of positive values as she insists, but she still does feminist theory an important service in reminding us of its affirmative potentials.

The final chapter, "Feminism and the Islamic Revival," takes another cut into questions of identity and freedom by examining women in a situation that most Western feminists would regard as highly oppressive. It revolves around anthropologist Saba Mahmood's  Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject. [7]  Through her reading of Mahmood's ethnographic study of the women in the "piety" movement in the mosques of Cairo, Weir argues that we should reconceptualize freedom not as individual but as a "practice of belonging." Aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood, the women's piety movement engages its members in the study of Islam and in rigorous practices of devotion through which they aim to attain a stronger connection with god. Drawing for insight on Foucault, Mahmood argues that the pietist women demonstrate a strong capacity for agency by embracing discipline and by  inhabiting  Islamic norms. However she does not attribute a  resistant  agency to them (143). Weir challenges Mahmood's reading of her own ethnographic research, instead reading it as demonstrating the creation of new and resistant identities on the part of the women. She cites an example from the book of a woman named Abir who, through her commitment to piety, challenges the Islamic norms of wifely obedience and resists her more "modernizing" husband who does not want her to participate in such "backward" practices. Mahmood herself thinks that Abir's challenge "did not represent a break with the significatory system of Islamic norms" (cited 144) but rather was enabled by it. However, against this interpretation, Weir argues that critique and resistance do not have to involve a challenge to norms. Rather, she argues, the pietists should be understood as " reworking and renegotiating connections , and thereby renegotiating and transforming their identities" (144).

Weir's claim, that "the women in the mosque movement are engaged in the transformations of their identities and in attempts to transform Islamic society" (146), imputes to them meanings and intentions that they would not recognize as their own. Additionally, I am concerned about Weir's suggestion that the example of the piety movement demonstrates more generally "that freedom can be found in belonging to a defining community, in which one feels supported to explore and to strengthen one's relationship to one's ideals" (147). For we must surely ask also about the  value  of the specific ideals that are being embraced by a given community and, in particular, about the implications of these ideals for others who do not embrace them and are excluded. In the Egyptian context, such issues of inclusion and exclusion have recently moved sharply into focus with the coming to political power of the Muslim Brotherhood, followed by mass resistance to it and, now, its suppression. In the US context, I find myself wondering, rather uncomfortably, whether some might not enjoy a similar kind of "freedom in belonging" to that of the pietist women by participating in a white supremacist community or a cult.

Weir concludes by asking us to recognize that freedom takes many different forms. She is surely right, and  Identities and Freedom  invites us to think creatively about the many faces that freedom may take. Her core argument, that feminists should retrieve an appreciation of collective identity and ways of belonging as conducive to freedom and self-transformation, is both timely and welcome. However, we need also to think more closely about the dangers that freedom for some may pose for the freedom of others. Here, I return to the warnings against the exclusionary temptations of the comforts of "home" made by early critics of feminist "sisterhood." When Weir writes, at the conclusion to her discussion of the piety movement, that what feminism (that is, Western feminism) perhaps needs is "an ideal of freedom as the condition of being supported in our care for each other, a freedom that is the capacity to participate fully in our relationships with each other, with whom and with what we love" (p.147), I cannot help but wonder who "we" are and how this "we" is positioned in relation to those whom "we" do not "love."

That I am critical of some aspects of this book is not, however, to dismiss its significance. Very far from it, for it is ambitious in scope and its insights are manifold. That it stimulates critical questioning on my part is to say that it is profoundly engaging and provocative -- it is a book that all feminist philosophers, and many others concerned with questions concerning identity, freedom, power, and connection should read.

[1]  See Bernice Johnson Reagon, "Coalition Politics: Turning the Century." In Barbara Smith, ed.,  Home Girls: A Black Feminist Anthology . New York: Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press, 1983; Minnie Bruce Pratt, "Identity: Skin Blood Heart." In Elly Bulkin et al, eds.,  Yours in Struggle: Three Feminist Perspectives on Anti-Semitism and Racism . Ithaca, NY: Firebrand Books, 1988; Biddy Martin and Chandra Mohanty, "Feminist Politics: What's Home Got to Do with It?" In Teresa de Lauretis, ed.  Feminist Studies/Critical Studies . Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986.

[2]  Iris Marion Young, "House and Home: Feminist Variations on a Theme" In  Intersecting Voices: Dilemmas of Gender, Political Philosophy, and Policy . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997, pp. 134-164, p. 162.

[3]  Maria Lugones, "Playfulness, 'world'-traveling, and loving perception." In  Pilgrimages/Peregrinajes: Theorizing Coalition Against Multiple Oppressions . Lanham, Md: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003 (essay originally published in 1987).

[4]  As Linda Nicholson has pointed out, historically, psychoanalytic notions of "identification" long precede those of "identity politics." See her  Identity Before Identity Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

[5]  I discuss women's embodied affect and emotions as potential sources of feminist identification among women in Sonia Kruks,  Retrieving Experience: Subjectivity and Recognition in Feminist Politics . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2001.

[6]  Linda Zerilli,  Feminism and the Abyss of Freedom . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.

[7]  Saba Mahmood,  Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.

Essays About Freedom: 5 Helpful Examples and 7 Prompts

Freedom seems simple at first; however, it is quite a nuanced topic at a closer glance. If you are writing essays about freedom, read our guide of essay examples and writing prompts.

In a world where we constantly hear about violence, oppression, and war, few things are more important than freedom. It is the ability to act, speak, or think what we want without being controlled or subjected. It can be considered the gateway to achieving our goals, as we can take the necessary steps. 

However, freedom is not always “doing whatever we want.” True freedom means to do what is righteous and reasonable, even if there is the option to do otherwise. Moreover, freedom must come with responsibility; this is why laws are in place to keep society orderly but not too micro-managed, to an extent.

5 Examples of Essays About Freedom

1. essay on “freedom” by pragati ghosh, 2. acceptance is freedom by edmund perry, 3. reflecting on the meaning of freedom by marquita herald.

• 4.  Authentic Freedom by Wilfred Carlson

5. What are freedom and liberty? by Yasmin Youssef

1. what is freedom, 2. freedom in the contemporary world, 3. is freedom “not free”, 4. moral and ethical issues concerning freedom, 5. freedom vs. security, 6. free speech and hate speech, 7. an experience of freedom.

“Freedom is non denial of our basic rights as humans. Some freedom is specific to the age group that we fall into. A child is free to be loved and cared by parents and other members of family and play around. So this nurturing may be the idea of freedom to a child. Living in a crime free society in safe surroundings may mean freedom to a bit grown up child.”

In her essay, Ghosh briefly describes what freedom means to her. It is the ability to live your life doing what you want. However, she writes that we must keep in mind the dignity and freedom of others. One cannot simply kill and steal from people in the name of freedom; it is not absolute. She also notes that different cultures and age groups have different notions of freedom. Freedom is a beautiful thing, but it must be exercised in moderation. 

“They demonstrate that true freedom is about being accepted, through the scenarios that Ambrose Flack has written for them to endure. In The Strangers That Came to Town, the Duvitches become truly free at the finale of the story. In our own lives, we must ask: what can we do to help others become truly free?”

Perry’s essay discusses freedom in the context of Ambrose Flack’s short story The Strangers That Came to Town : acceptance is the key to being free. When the immigrant Duvitch family moved into a new town, they were not accepted by the community and were deprived of the freedom to live without shame and ridicule. However, when some townspeople reach out, the Duvitches feel empowered and relieved and are no longer afraid to go out and be themselves. 

“Freedom is many things, but those issues that are often in the forefront of conversations these days include the freedom to choose, to be who you truly are, to express yourself and to live your life as you desire so long as you do not hurt or restrict the personal freedom of others. I’ve compiled a collection of powerful quotations on the meaning of freedom to share with you, and if there is a single unifying theme it is that we must remember at all times that, regardless of where you live, freedom is not carved in stone, nor does it come without a price.”

In her short essay, Herald contemplates on freedom and what it truly means. She embraces her freedom and uses it to live her life to the fullest and to teach those around her. She values freedom and closes her essay with a list of quotations on the meaning of freedom, all with something in common: freedom has a price. With our freedom, we must be responsible. You might also be interested in these essays about consumerism .

4.   Authentic Freedom by Wilfred Carlson

“Freedom demands of one, or rather obligates one to concern ourselves with the affairs of the world around us. If you look at the world around a human being, countries where freedom is lacking, the overall population is less concerned with their fellow man, then in a freer society. The same can be said of individuals, the more freedom a human being has, and the more responsible one acts to other, on the whole.”

Carlson writes about freedom from a more religious perspective, saying that it is a right given to us by God. However, authentic freedom is doing what is right and what will help others rather than simply doing what one wants. If freedom were exercised with “doing what we want” in mind, the world would be disorderly. True freedom requires us to care for others and work together to better society. 

“In my opinion, the concepts of freedom and liberty are what makes us moral human beings. They include individual capacities to think, reason, choose and value different situations. It also means taking individual responsibility for ourselves, our decisions and actions. It includes self-governance and self-determination in combination with critical thinking, respect, transparency and tolerance. We should let no stone unturned in the attempt to reach a state of full freedom and liberty, even if it seems unrealistic and utopic.”

Youssef’s essay describes the concepts of freedom and liberty and how they allow us to do what we want without harming others. She notes that respect for others does not always mean agreeing with them. We can disagree, but we should not use our freedom to infringe on that of the people around us. To her, freedom allows us to choose what is good, think critically, and innovate. 

7 Prompts for Essays About Freedom

Freedom is quite a broad topic and can mean different things to different people. For your essay, define freedom and explain what it means to you. For example, freedom could mean having the right to vote, the right to work, or the right to choose your path in life. Then, discuss how you exercise your freedom based on these definitions and views. 

The world as we know it is constantly changing, and so is the entire concept of freedom. Research the state of freedom in the world today and center your essay on the topic of modern freedom. For example, discuss freedom while still needing to work to pay bills and ask, “Can we truly be free when we cannot choose with the constraints of social norms?” You may compare your situation to the state of freedom in other countries and in the past if you wish. 

A common saying goes like this: “Freedom is not free.” Reflect on this quote and write your essay about what it means to you: how do you understand it? In addition, explain whether you believe it to be true or not, depending on your interpretation. 

Many contemporary issues exemplify both the pros and cons of freedom; for example, slavery shows the worst when freedom is taken away, while gun violence exposes the disadvantages of too much freedom. First, discuss one issue regarding freedom and briefly touch on its causes and effects. Then, be sure to explain how it relates to freedom. 

Some believe that more laws curtail the right to freedom and liberty. In contrast, others believe that freedom and regulation can coexist, saying that freedom must come with the responsibility to ensure a safe and orderly society. Take a stand on this issue and argue for your position, supporting your response with adequate details and credible sources. 

Many people, especially online, have used their freedom of speech to attack others based on race and gender, among other things. Many argue that hate speech is still free and should be protected, while others want it regulated. Is it infringing on freedom? You decide and be sure to support your answer adequately. Include a rebuttal of the opposing viewpoint for a more credible argumentative essay. 

For your essay, you can also reflect on a time you felt free. It could be your first time going out alone, moving into a new house, or even going to another country. How did it make you feel? Reflect on your feelings, particularly your sense of freedom, and explain them in detail. 

Check out our guide packed full of transition words for essays .If you are interested in learning more, check out our essay writing tips !

Martin is an avid writer specializing in editing and proofreading. He also enjoys literary analysis and writing about food and travel.

View all posts

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Life Freedom

What Does Freedom Mean to Me: a Privilege and a Responsibility

Table of contents, personal definition of freedom, dimensions of freedom, the impact of freedom.

• Mill, J. S. (1859). On Liberty. Longman, Roberts & Green.
• Arendt, H. (1969). On Violence. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.
• Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
• Beauvoir, S. d. (1949). The Second Sex. Vintage Books.

*minimum deadline

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below

• Affordable Housing
• Homesickness
• Driving Age

Related Essays

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Photo by Trent Parke/Magnum

You are a network

You cannot be reduced to a body, a mind or a particular social role. an emerging theory of selfhood gets this complexity.

by Kathleen Wallace   + BIO

Who am I? We all ask ourselves this question, and many like it. Is my identity determined by my DNA or am I product of how I’m raised? Can I change, and if so, how much? Is my identity just one thing, or can I have more than one? Since its beginning, philosophy has grappled with these questions, which are important to how we make choices and how we interact with the world around us. Socrates thought that self-understanding was essential to knowing how to live, and how to live well with oneself and with others. Self-determination depends on self-knowledge, on knowledge of others and of the world around you. Even forms of government are grounded in how we understand ourselves and human nature. So the question ‘Who am I?’ has far-reaching implications.

Many philosophers, at least in the West, have sought to identify the invariable or essential conditions of being a self. A widely taken approach is what’s known as a psychological continuity view of the self, where the self is a consciousness with self-awareness and personal memories. Sometimes these approaches frame the self as a combination of mind and body, as René Descartes did, or as primarily or solely consciousness. John Locke’s prince/pauper thought experiment, wherein a prince’s consciousness and all his memories are transferred into the body of a cobbler, is an illustration of the idea that personhood goes with consciousness. Philosophers have devised numerous subsequent thought experiments – involving personality transfers, split brains and teleporters – to explore the psychological approach. Contemporary philosophers in the ‘animalist’ camp are critical of the psychological approach, and argue that selves are essentially human biological organisms. ( Aristotle might also be closer to this approach than to the purely psychological.) Both psychological and animalist approaches are ‘container’ frameworks, positing the body as a container of psychological functions or the bounded location of bodily functions.

All these approaches reflect philosophers’ concern to focus on what the distinguishing or definitional characteristic of a self is, the thing that will pick out a self and nothing else, and that will identify selves as selves, regardless of their particular differences. On the psychological view, a self is a personal consciousness. On the animalist view, a self is a human organism or animal. This has tended to lead to a somewhat one-dimensional and simplified view of what a self is, leaving out social, cultural and interpersonal traits that are also distinctive of selves and are often what people would regard as central to their self-identity. Just as selves have different personal memories and self-awareness, they can have different social and interpersonal relations, cultural backgrounds and personalities. The latter are variable in their specificity, but are just as important to being a self as biology, memory and self-awareness.

Recognising the influence of these factors, some philosophers have pushed against such reductive approaches and argued for a framework that recognises the complexity and multidimensionality of persons. The network self view emerges from this trend. It began in the later 20th century and has continued in the 21st, when philosophers started to move toward a broader understanding of selves. Some philosophers propose narrative and anthropological views of selves. Communitarian and feminist philosophers argue for relational views that recognise the social embeddedness, relatedness and intersectionality of selves. According to relational views, social relations and identities are fundamental to understanding who persons are.

Social identities are traits of selves in virtue of membership in communities (local, professional, ethnic, religious, political), or in virtue of social categories (such as race, gender, class, political affiliation) or interpersonal relations (such as being a spouse, sibling, parent, friend, neighbour). These views imply that it’s not only embodiment and not only memory or consciousness of social relations but the relations themselves that also matter to who the self is. What philosophers call ‘4E views’ of cognition – for embodied, embedded, enactive and extended cognition – are also a move in the direction of a more relational, less ‘container’, view of the self. Relational views signal a paradigm shift from a reductive approach to one that seeks to recognise the complexity of the self. The network self view further develops this line of thought and says that the self is relational through and through, consisting not only of social but also physical, genetic, psychological, emotional and biological relations that together form a network self. The self also changes over time, acquiring and losing traits in virtue of new social locations and relations, even as it continues as that one self.

H ow do you self-identify? You probably have many aspects to yourself and would resist being reduced to or stereotyped as any one of them. But you might still identify yourself in terms of your heritage, ethnicity, race, religion: identities that are often prominent in identity politics. You might identify yourself in terms of other social and personal relationships and characteristics – ‘I’m Mary’s sister.’ ‘I’m a music-lover.’ ‘I’m Emily’s thesis advisor.’ ‘I’m a Chicagoan.’ Or you might identify personality characteristics: ‘I’m an extrovert’; or commitments: ‘I care about the environment.’ ‘I’m honest.’ You might identify yourself comparatively: ‘I’m the tallest person in my family’; or in terms of one’s political beliefs or affiliations: ‘I’m an independent’; or temporally: ‘I’m the person who lived down the hall from you in college,’ or ‘I’m getting married next year.’ Some of these are more important than others, some are fleeting. The point is that who you are is more complex than any one of your identities. Thinking of the self as a network is a way to conceptualise this complexity and fluidity.

Let’s take a concrete example. Consider Lindsey: she is spouse, mother, novelist, English speaker, Irish Catholic, feminist, professor of philosophy, automobile driver, psychobiological organism, introverted, fearful of heights, left-handed, carrier of Huntington’s disease (HD), resident of New York City. This is not an exhaustive set, just a selection of traits or identities. Traits are related to one another to form a network of traits. Lindsey is an inclusive network, a plurality of traits related to one another. The overall character – the integrity – of a self is constituted by the unique interrelatedness of its particular relational traits, psychobiological, social, political, cultural, linguistic and physical.

Figure 1 below is based on an approach to modelling ecological networks; the nodes represent traits, and the lines are relations between traits (without specifying the kind of relation).

We notice right away the complex interrelatedness among Lindsey’s traits. We can also see that some traits seem to be clustered, that is, related more to some traits than to others. Just as a body is a highly complex, organised network of organismic and molecular systems, the self is a highly organised network. Traits of the self can organise into clusters or hubs, such as a body cluster, a family cluster, a social cluster. There might be other clusters, but keeping it to a few is sufficient to illustrate the idea. A second approximation, Figure 2 below, captures the clustering idea.

Figures 1 and 2 (both from my book , The Network Self ) are simplifications of the bodily, personal and social relations that make up the self. Traits can be closely clustered, but they also cross over and intersect with traits in other hubs or clusters. For instance, a genetic trait – ‘Huntington’s disease carrier’ (HD in figures 1 and 2) – is related to biological, family and social traits. If the carrier status is known, there are also psychological and social relations to other carriers and to familial and medical communities. Clusters or sub-networks are not isolated, or self-enclosed hubs, and might regroup as the self develops.

Sometimes her experience might be fractured, as when others take one of her identities as defining all of her

Some traits might be more dominant than others. Being a spouse might be strongly relevant to who Lindsey is, whereas being an aunt weakly relevant. Some traits might be more salient in some contexts than others. In Lindsey’s neighbourhood, being a parent might be more salient than being a philosopher, whereas at the university being a philosopher is more prominent.

Lindsey can have a holistic experience of her multifaceted, interconnected network identity. Sometimes, though, her experience might be fractured, as when others take one of her identities as defining all of her. Suppose that, in an employment context, she isn’t promoted, earns a lower salary or isn’t considered for a job because of her gender. Discrimination is when an identity – race, gender, ethnicity – becomes the way in which someone is identified by others, and therefore might experience herself as reduced or objectified. It is the inappropriate, arbitrary or unfair salience of a trait in a context.

Lindsey might feel conflict or tension between her identities. She might not want to be reduced to or stereotyped by any one identity. She might feel the need to dissimulate, suppress or conceal some identity, as well as associated feelings and beliefs. She might feel that some of these are not essential to who she really is. But even if some are less important than others, and some are strongly relevant to who she is and identifies as, they’re all still interconnected ways in which Lindsey is.

F igures 1 and 2 above represent the network self, Lindsey, at a cross-section of time, say at early to mid-adulthood. What about the changeableness and fluidity of the self? What about other stages of Lindsey’s life? Lindsey-at-age-five is not a spouse or a mother, and future stages of Lindsey might include different traits and relations too: she might divorce or change careers or undergo a gender identity transformation. The network self is also a process .

It might seem strange at first to think of yourself as a process. You might think that processes are just a series of events, and your self feels more substantial than that. Maybe you think of yourself as an entity that’s distinct from relations, that change is something that happens to an unchangeable core that is you. You’d be in good company if you do. There’s a long history in philosophy going back to Aristotle arguing for a distinction between a substance and its properties, between substance and relations, and between entities and events.

However, the idea that the self is a network and a process is more plausible than you might think. Paradigmatic substances, such as the body, are systems of networks that are in constant process even when we don’t see that at a macro level: cells are replaced, hair and nails grow, food is digested, cellular and molecular processes are ongoing as long as the body is alive. Consciousness or the stream of awareness itself is in constant flux. Psychological dispositions or attitudes might be subject to variation in expression and occurrence. They’re not fixed and invariable, even when they’re somewhat settled aspects of a self. Social traits evolve. For example, Lindsey-as-daughter develops and changes. Lindsey-as-mother is not only related to her current traits, but also to her own past, in how she experienced being a daughter. Many past experiences and relations have shaped how she is now. New beliefs and attitudes might be acquired and old ones revised. There’s constancy, too, as traits don’t all change at the same pace and maybe some don’t change at all. But the temporal spread, so to speak, of the self means that how a self as a whole is at any time is a cumulative upshot of what it’s been and how it’s projecting itself forward.

Anchoring and transformation, sameness and change: the cumulative network is both-and , not either-or

Rather than an underlying, unchanging substance that acquires and loses properties, we’re making a paradigm shift to seeing the self as a process, as a cumulative network with a changeable integrity. A cumulative network has structure and organisation, as many natural processes do, whether we think of biological developments, physical processes or social processes. Think of this constancy and structure as stages of the self overlapping with, or mapping on to, one another. For Lindsey, being a sibling overlaps from Lindsey-at-six to the death of the sibling; being a spouse overlaps from Lindsey-at-30 to the end of the marriage. Moreover, even if her sibling dies, or her marriage crumbles, sibling and spouse would still be traits of Lindsey’s history – a history that belongs to her and shapes the structure of the cumulative network.

If the self is its history, does that mean it can’t really change much? What about someone who wants to be liberated from her past, or from her present circumstances? Someone who emigrates or flees family and friends to start a new life or undergoes a radical transformation doesn’t cease to have been who they were. Indeed, experiences of conversion or transformation are of that self, the one who is converting, transforming, emigrating. Similarly, imagine the experience of regret or renunciation. You did something that you now regret, that you would never do again, that you feel was an expression of yourself when you were very different from who you are now. Still, regret makes sense only if you’re the person who in the past acted in some way. When you regret, renounce and apologise, you acknowledge your changed self as continuous with and owning your own past as the author of the act. Anchoring and transformation, continuity and liberation, sameness and change: the cumulative network is both-and , not either-or .

Transformation can happen to a self or it can be chosen. It can be positive or negative. It can be liberating or diminishing. Take a chosen transformation. Lindsey undergoes a gender transformation, and becomes Paul. Paul doesn’t cease to have been Lindsey, the self who experienced a mismatch between assigned gender and his own sense of self-identification, even though Paul might prefer his history as Lindsey to be a nonpublic dimension of himself. The cumulative network now known as Paul still retains many traits – biological, genetic, familial, social, psychological – of its prior configuration as Lindsey, and is shaped by the history of having been Lindsey. Or consider the immigrant. She doesn’t cease to be the self whose history includes having been a resident and citizen of another country.

T he network self is changeable but continuous as it maps on to a new phase of the self. Some traits become relevant in new ways. Some might cease to be relevant in the present while remaining part of the self’s history. There’s no prescribed path for the self. The self is a cumulative network because its history persists, even if there are many aspects of its history that a self disavows going forward or even if the way in which its history is relevant changes. Recognising that the self is a cumulative network allows us to account for why radical transformation is of a self and not, literally, a different self.

Now imagine a transformation that’s not chosen but that happens to someone: for example, to a parent with Alzheimer’s disease. They are still parent, citizen, spouse, former professor. They are still their history; they are still that person undergoing debilitating change. The same is true of the person who experiences dramatic physical change, someone such as the actor Christopher Reeve who had quadriplegia after an accident, or the physicist Stephen Hawking whose capacities were severely compromised by ALS (motor neuron disease). Each was still parent, citizen, spouse, actor/scientist and former athlete. The parent with dementia experiences loss of memory, and of psychological and cognitive capacities, a diminishment in a subset of her network. The person with quadriplegia or ALS experiences loss of motor capacities, a bodily diminishment. Each undoubtedly leads to alteration in social traits and depends on extensive support from others to sustain themselves as selves.

Sometimes people say that the person with dementia who doesn’t know themselves or others anymore isn’t really the same person that they were, or maybe isn’t even a person at all. This reflects an appeal to the psychological view – that persons are essentially consciousness. But seeing the self as a network takes a different view. The integrity of the self is broader than personal memory and consciousness. A diminished self might still have many of its traits, however that self’s history might be constituted in particular.

Plato, long before Freud, recognised that self-knowledge is a hard-won and provisional achievement

The poignant account ‘Still Gloria’ (2017) by the Canadian bioethicist Françoise Baylis of her mother’s Alzheimer’s reflects this perspective. When visiting her mother, Baylis helps to sustain the integrity of Gloria’s self even when Gloria can no longer do that for herself. But she’s still herself. Does that mean that self-knowledge isn’t important? Of course not. Gloria’s diminished capacities are a contraction of her self, and might be a version of what happens in some degree for an ageing self who experiences a weakening of capacities. And there’s a lesson here for any self: none of us is completely transparent to ourselves. This isn’t a new idea; even Plato, long before Freud, recognised that there were unconscious desires, and that self-knowledge is a hard-won and provisional achievement. The process of self-questioning and self-discovery is ongoing through life because we don’t have fixed and immutable identities: our identity is multiple, complex and fluid.

This means that others don’t know us perfectly either. When people try to fix someone’s identity as one particular characteristic, it can lead to misunderstanding, stereotyping, discrimination. Our currently polarised rhetoric seems to do just that – to lock people into narrow categories: ‘white’, ‘Black’, ‘Christian’, ‘Muslim’, ‘conservative’, ‘progressive’. But selves are much more complex and rich. Seeing ourselves as a network is a fertile way to understand our complexity. Perhaps it could even help break the rigid and reductive stereotyping that dominates current cultural and political discourse, and cultivate more productive communication. We might not understand ourselves or others perfectly, but we often have overlapping identities and perspectives. Rather than seeing our multiple identities as separating us from one another, we should see them as bases for communication and understanding, even if partial. Lindsey is a white woman philosopher. Her identity as a philosopher is shared with other philosophers (men, women, white, not white). At the same time, she might share an identity as a woman philosopher with other women philosophers whose experiences as philosophers have been shaped by being women. Sometimes communication is more difficult than others, as when some identities are ideologically rejected, or seem so different that communication can’t get off the ground. But the multiple identities of the network self provide a basis for the possibility of common ground.

How else might the network self contribute to practical, living concerns? One of the most important contributors to our sense of wellbeing is the sense of being in control of our own lives, of being self-directing. You might worry that the multiplicity of the network self means that it’s determined by other factors and can’t be self -determining. The thought might be that freedom and self-determination start with a clean slate, with a self that has no characteristics, social relations, preferences or capabilities that would predetermine it. But such a self would lack resources for giving itself direction. Such a being would be buffeted by external forces rather than realising its own potentialities and making its own choices. That would be randomness, not self-determination. In contrast, rather than limiting the self, the network view sees the multiple identities as resources for a self that’s actively setting its own direction and making choices for itself. Lindsey might prioritise career over parenthood for a period of time, she might commit to finishing her novel, setting philosophical work aside. Nothing prevents a network self from freely choosing a direction or forging new ones. Self-determination expresses the self. It’s rooted in self-understanding.

The network self view envisions an enriched self and multiple possibilities for self-determination, rather than prescribing a particular way that selves ought to be. That doesn’t mean that a self doesn’t have responsibilities to and for others. Some responsibilities might be inherited, though many are chosen. That’s part of the fabric of living with others. Selves are not only ‘networked’, that is, in social networks, but are themselves networks. By embracing the complexity and fluidity of selves, we come to a better understanding of who we are and how to live well with ourselves and with one another.

To read more about the self, visit Psyche , a digital magazine from Aeon that illuminates the human condition through psychology, philosophical understanding and the arts.

Thinkers and theories

Our tools shape our selves

For Bernard Stiegler, a visionary philosopher of our digital age, technics is the defining feature of human experience

Bryan Norton

Family life

A patchwork family

After my marriage failed, I strove to create a new family – one made beautiful by the loving way it’s stitched together

The cell is not a factory

Scientific narratives project social hierarchies onto nature. That’s why we need better metaphors to describe cellular life

Charudatta Navare

Stories and literature

Terrifying vistas of reality

H P Lovecraft, the master of cosmic horror stories, was a philosopher who believed in the total insignificance of humanity

Sam Woodward

The dangers of AI farming

AI could lead to new ways for people to abuse animals for financial gain. That’s why we need strong ethical guidelines

Virginie Simoneau-Gilbert & Jonathan Birch

A man beyond categories

Paul Tillich was a religious socialist and a profoundly subtle theologian who placed doubt at the centre of his thought

The meaning of freedom today Analytical Essay

Introduction, personal freedom, sartre’s existentialist definition of freedom, equality and independence, karl marx on freedom, the practice of freedom, michael foucault on freedom.

In the contemporary society, people consider freedom a basic need in that person who is not free must be in a rough co-existence with him and others. It is therefore very important to exalt freedom, which begins with personal liberty to the sovereignty of nations.

The extent to which a person can be free as well as the exact definition of freedom has been subjected to philosophical discourses from time immemorial with renowned philosophers such as Karl Marx, Michael Foucault and Jean Paul Sartre having differing arguments in the matter. According to the school of thought that each one of them represented, the idea of freedom to them bears differing definitions and extends.

In order to come up with an agreeable and logical definition of freedom as it is in the contemporary society, people have critically analyzed the input of these philosophers and their definition of freedom in this paper with the intention of clearly understanding what freedom is according to the schools of thought they represent today.

As I reveal, the exact meaning of freedom must comprise of the different aspects such as personal liberty, the right to life, equality and independence from coercion and repressive conditions such as poverty, ignorance and diseases. Any meaning of freedom is wanting if it does not address the issue of personal liberty.

Freedom starts with a sense of self-control or rather self-ownership. In this case, reason influences the person’s sense of freedom. In a free state, every person receives an equal chance of exercising freedom at personal level. In this case, no other person influences another’s decisions and the extent to which he/she makes decisions remains strictly limited by him/her.

This is in other words to say that in a free state a person’s freedom is not limited as long as it does not impact negatively or limit the freedom of the other people. For instance, a person’s freedom cannot include enslaving other people. As a slave, a person is not free to make certain decisions, movements and interactions with other people in the society.

In a free state therefore, a person is not entitle to take the freedom of another person for personal interests since it is against their wish to be treated so. My fellow panelist Sartre concurs with my view of freedom despite his limited definition of the freedom.

According to Jean Paul Sartre, man is condemned to be free. This is without regard to whether he acts from external constraints to repress it or just follows his pragmatic decisions.

A person is free when s/he refuses to act in bad faith and instead follow what he is. For instance, when the waiter who knows really well that he is impersonating a waiter stops that and instead does what his freedom grants, he is at that particular moment embracing freedom.

By being a waiter, the person is only denying his or her own freedom. According to existentialism, one cannot claim that external forces shape his/her deeds or actions. For instance, the profession of a person cannot shape the person’s identity considering that the roles played in that profession are only as a matter of bad faith and will eventually cease.

Being aware of one’s significance in the process of doing the roles in the profession inform the choices that a person makes and that seem directed to the person’s sense of freedom. However, I stand to criticize his definition based on how limited it appears.

Sartre, as well as other existentialists, concentrates more on the intrinsic definition of self-freedom rather than giving a definition and an extent to freedom that one can put into practice in the contemporary society. He does not clarify whether a person is free or not clearly defined in that existentialists hold that in every situation a person has still the freedom of choice.

Having the freedom of choice is not that important and does not qualify as being the absolute meaning of being free. This is basically for the simple reason that even a person who is enslaved by another has the freedom to choose either to rebel or to show complicity but that does not mean that they are free.

In the contemporary society, a person is only free if any other person or condition can implement his /her thoughts and choices without any repression. The issue of equality of freedom constitutes the meaning of freedom.

Equality is very essential in any situation for a person to be free in the contemporary society. This ranges from political, sexual, racial as well as religious equality.

For people to consider another as free in a free state, he/she must go through an equal treatment with others regardless of their gender or any other affiliations. When a person is marginalized on the any of the above areas, their freedom is interfered with and eventually the person is deprived the necessity of being free.

With equality comes independence in making decisions as well as living without any coercion from anyone. This implies that the different types of independence that Karl Marx and others who embrace the Marxist school of thought argued mostly about.

Karl Marx in his Manifesto of the communist party conceptualizes freedom from an economic point of view. Marx conceptualizes freedom from an individualistic point of view whereby he argues that freedom is an individual’s collective use of reason to create a reconciled definition of personal and public freedom.

From this, Marx argues that a person who exercises freedom at the expense of the masses abuses it since the freedom of the majority is the one that matters. For instance, a person who owns means of production and abuses his employees for the sake of enriching himself and expanding his financial freedom by enriching himself is infringing the freedom of the others.

It is therefore clear from his arguments that Marx’s view of freedom is more informed by the social relations of people in the society. He argues that for a state to be termed as free there has to be a revolution whereby the proletariat overpower the bourgeoisie and own the means of production.

In that case, the majority would be free in that they will be in a position to cope with life without the fear of being oppressed by a powerful ruling class. However, I stand to criticize the view based on its one-sidedness.

Marx’s idea of the masses overpowering the ruling class, as a necessary precondition for their freedom, is one sided and has failed to hold on for a long time. This stands out because he fails to address other important aspects such as equality, the addressing of human rights and the dealing with other factors that lead to the oppression of people.

His address however on the issue of economic oppression holds until today as evidenced by workers rising up against their oppressive employers in the contemporary society and demanding for a fair exchange for their labor. This is because a person’s freedom seems abused if he/she faces oppression in any given situation.

The fact that in order to be completely free one must keenly be aware of the limits of his/her freedom is a very important factor to consider when defining freedom in the society today.

This is in the sense that other people’s freedom is as important as your freedom. A question arises as to whether a person has or should have the right to defend him/herself against coercion. This brings forth a quite interesting aspect of freedom regarded as the freedom of defense.

In most Free states where freedom of people seems held with dignity, always a system acts to differentiate acts of coercion as either offensive or defensive. In this case, whether a person acted in an effort to defend him/herself or was interfering with another’s rights is established. Foucault’s meaning today’s of freedom is wanting based on its failure to explain how one can free him/herself.

According to Michael Foucault, being free is a practice of the different practices of freedom. To him it is therefore a continuous process. Foucault emphasizes more on the practices of freedom over the process of liberation. He argues that it the practices of freedom that eventually upholds freedom rather than the process of liberation.

For instance, he uses the example of a colonized nation, which liberates itself from the colonizers. The society would still be in need of practices of freedom as they engage in building their own government.

One can clearly notice that Foucault’s works are in a way, skeptical about the extent to which people can free themselves. If people cannot stand out of the constraints of relations of power, knowledge and subjectivity, then to him their practices of freedom are simply on a small notion of resistance from within.

In order to answer the question of what one exactly means by ‘being free’ in the contemporary society, it is of great essence to be all-round while addressing the aspects of freedom.

The problem with the definitions and the answers that philosophers Karl Marx, Michael Foucault and Jean Paul Sartre presents is that they are in most cases one sided whereby they all aimed at addressing a single aspect within the complex issue of freedom. Therefore, it is arguable that one can summon their arguments to contribute to the broad definition of today’s freedom.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, January 10). The meaning of freedom today. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-meaning-of-freedom-today/

"The meaning of freedom today." IvyPanda , 10 Jan. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/the-meaning-of-freedom-today/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'The meaning of freedom today'. 10 January.

IvyPanda . 2020. "The meaning of freedom today." January 10, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-meaning-of-freedom-today/.

1. IvyPanda . "The meaning of freedom today." January 10, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-meaning-of-freedom-today/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The meaning of freedom today." January 10, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-meaning-of-freedom-today/.

• Jean-Paul Sartre's Views on Freedom
• Sartre on Human Condition
• Sartre's Philosophy of Existentialism
• Jean Paul Sartre: Bad Faith Concept
• "Existence Precedes Essence" a Term by Sartre
• Concepts of Sartre’s “Existentialism Is a Humanism”
• Relationship Between Body and Consciousness by Jean-Paul Sartre
• Nietzsche’s and Sartre’s Views on Morality
• Hell in Dante's Inferno and Sartre's No Exit
• Satre human freedom
• Nietzsche: Death of God
• St. Augustine. Solution to the Problem of Evil
• The Concept of Metaphysics and Nature
• Inequality's Philosophical Description
• “What Is the Meaning of Life?” in the Works of Gilgamesh and Agamemnon

Calculate for all schools

Your chance of acceptance, your chancing factors, extracurriculars, how do i write a college essay about my identity.

My identity has played a big role in my life, and I want to write about it in my college essay. How can I approach this topic in a way that showcases who I am without sounding cliché or overly dramatic? Thanks for any suggestions!

Hello! I'm glad to see that you're considering writing about your identity, as it's an important part of who you are. To avoid sounding cliché or overly dramatic, there are a few tips I'd like to share with you.

First, focus on specific experiences or moments that have shaped your identity. Instead of making general statements, think about the events in your life that have had a significant impact on you and what you learned from them. This will help you tell a unique story that only you can tell.

Second, don't be afraid to be vulnerable. Sharing your personal thoughts and feelings can make your essay more engaging and relatable. For example, my child wrote about their experience as an immigrant, discussing the challenges they faced in adapting to a new culture and how it shaped their perspective on life.

Third, use vivid language and descriptive details to paint a picture for your reader. This will make your essay more memorable and allow your reader to connect with your story on a deeper level. For example, instead of just saying 'I felt out of place,' describe the physical and emotional sensations you experienced in that moment.

Finally, make sure to tie your identity back to your goals, values, or aspirations. Show how your identity has influenced your choices and what you hope to accomplish in the future. This will give your essay a sense of purpose and demonstrate your growth as an individual.

I hope these tips help you craft a compelling essay that showcases your unique identity. Best of luck with your college applications!

About CollegeVine’s Expert FAQ

CollegeVine’s Q&A seeks to offer informed perspectives on commonly asked admissions questions. Every answer is refined and validated by our team of admissions experts to ensure it resonates with trusted knowledge in the field.

• Submission Guidelines
• Marketing Information
• Exam Copies
• Desk Copies
• Sales Representatives
• Rights and Permissions
• Staff Directory
• Media Requests
• Individuals
• Booksellers

Browse By Author

Browse by category.

• Women's Studies
• Ferrol Sams Award Fiction
• Adrienne Bond Award Poetry
• Will Campbell Award Nonfiction
• African American Studies
• Appalachian Studies
• Art and Photography
• Biography and Memoir
• All Civil War
• Unit Histories
• All Southern Studies
• All Literary
• Literary Criticism
• Mercer Church Resources
• All Philosophy
• Kierkegaard
• All Religion
• American Biblical Hermeneuties
• Biblical Studies
• Higher Education
• Literature - Film - Music - Art
• Philosophy of Religion
• Religion Textbook
• Reprint of Scholarly Excellence
• Studies in OT Interpretation
• Baptists in Early North America
• Food and the American South
• Carson McCullers Series
• America's HBCUs
• AV Elliott Conference Series
• Walter Rauschenbusch
• Perspectives Baptist Identites
• Early English Baptist Texts
• Flannery O'Connor Series
• Intl Kierkegaard Commentary
• Mercer Commentary on the Bible
• Mercer Kierkegaard Studies
• Mercer Lib of Biblical Studies
• Modern Mission Era
• Music and the American South
• Sports and Religion
• State Narratives of Civil War
• Mercer Tillich Studies
• Voices of the African Diaspora
• Coming Soon

Share This Title

Mup catalogs.

Spring 2024

Freedom and Society: Essays on Autonomy, Identity, and Political Freedom

• Description
• Industry Reviews
• Goodreads Reviews
• You May Also Enjoy These Titles

Goodreads reviews

Mailing Address Mercer University Press 1501 Mercer University Drive Macon, GA 31207

Phone: 478.301.2880 (Local) Phone: 1.866.895.1472 (Toll Free) Fax: 478.301.2585 Email: [email protected]

Privacy Policy

Shopping Cart Software by AbleCommerce

Freedom Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on freedom.

Freedom is something that everybody has heard of but if you ask for its meaning then everyone will give you different meaning. This is so because everyone has a different opinion about freedom. For some freedom means the freedom of going anywhere they like, for some it means to speak up form themselves, and for some, it is liberty of doing anything they like.

Meaning of Freedom

The real meaning of freedom according to books is. Freedom refers to a state of independence where you can do what you like without any restriction by anyone. Moreover, freedom can be called a state of mind where you have the right and freedom of doing what you can think off. Also, you can feel freedom from within.

The Indian Freedom

Indian is a country which was earlier ruled by Britisher and to get rid of these rulers India fight back and earn their freedom. But during this long fight, many people lost their lives and because of the sacrifice of those people and every citizen of the country, India is a free country and the world largest democracy in the world.

Moreover, after independence India become one of those countries who give his citizen some freedom right without and restrictions.

The Indian Freedom Right

India drafted a constitution during the days of struggle with the Britishers and after independence it became applicable. In this constitution, the Indian citizen was given several fundaments right which is applicable to all citizen equally. More importantly, these right are the freedom that the constitution has given to every citizen.

These right are right to equality, right to freedom, right against exploitation, right to freedom of religion¸ culture and educational right, right to constitutional remedies, right to education. All these right give every freedom that they can’t get in any other country.

Value of Freedom

The real value of anything can only be understood by those who have earned it or who have sacrificed their lives for it. Freedom also means liberalization from oppression. It also means the freedom from racism, from harm, from the opposition, from discrimination and many more things.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Freedom does not mean that you violate others right, it does not mean that you disregard other rights. Moreover, freedom means enchanting the beauty of nature and the environment around us.

The Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech is the most common and prominent right that every citizen enjoy. Also, it is important because it is essential for the all-over development of the country.

Moreover, it gives way to open debates that helps in the discussion of thought and ideas that are essential for the growth of society.

Besides, this is the only right that links with all the other rights closely. More importantly, it is essential to express one’s view of his/her view about society and other things.

To conclude, we can say that Freedom is not what we think it is. It is a psychological concept everyone has different views on. Similarly, it has a different value for different people. But freedom links with happiness in a broadway.

FAQs on Freedom

Q.1 What is the true meaning of freedom? A.1 Freedom truly means giving equal opportunity to everyone for liberty and pursuit of happiness.

Q.2 What is freedom of expression means? A.2 Freedom of expression means the freedom to express one’s own ideas and opinions through the medium of writing, speech, and other forms of communication without causing any harm to someone’s reputation.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

• Human Editing
• Free AI Essay Writer
• AI Outline Generator
• AI Paragraph Generator
• Paragraph Expander
• Essay Expander
• Literature Review Generator
• Research Paper Generator
• Thesis Generator
• Paraphrasing tool
• AI Rewording Tool
• AI Sentence Rewriter
• AI Rephraser
• AI Paragraph Rewriter
• Summarizing Tool
• AI Content Shortener
• Plagiarism Checker
• AI Detector
• AI Essay Checker
• Citation Generator
• Reference Finder
• Book Citation Generator
• Legal Citation Generator
• Journal Citation Generator
• Reference Citation Generator
• Scientific Citation Generator
• Source Citation Generator
• Website Citation Generator
• URL Citation Generator
• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• AI Writing Guides
• AI Detection Guides
• Citation Guides
• Grammar Guides
• Paraphrasing Guides
• Plagiarism Guides
• Summary Writing Guides
• STEM Guides
• Humanities Guides
• Language Learning Guides
• Coding Guides
• Top Lists and Recommendations
• AI Detectors
• AI Writing Services
• Coding Homework Help
• Citation Generators
• Editing Websites
• Essay Writing Websites
• Language Learning Websites
• Math Solvers
• Paraphrasers
• Plagiarism Checkers
• Reference Finders
• Spell Checkers
• Summarizers
• Tutoring Websites

Most Popular

13 days ago

Typely Review

11 days ago

Clark County Schools Introduce Cell Phone Pouches to Enhance Learning Focus

23 of 25 students admit chatgpt use after professor’s amnesty offer, how to cite a tweet, teachers seek ai training – more than 70% had none, what is freedom definition essay example.

freepik.com

The given prompt: How do political, personal, and societal freedoms differ?

Freedom is a word that resonates deeply with most of us, often evoking powerful emotions. It is a term, however, that means different things in different contexts. From the vast political landscapes to the intimate corners of our minds, freedom has distinct implications. To grasp its true essence, let’s traverse the realms of political, personal, and societal freedoms.

Imagine living in a place where voicing your opinions could lead to imprisonment, or worse. Frightening, isn’t it? That’s where political freedom, or the lack of it, comes into play. Rooted in a country’s governance and laws, political freedom embodies the rights and liberties of its citizens. It speaks of democracy, of the right to vote, voice opinions, and participate in civic duties. This freedom ensures that power remains in the hands of the people and that leaders act in the nation’s best interest.

Shift the lens to a more individual perspective, and we encounter personal freedom. It’s about the choices we make daily, shaping our lives and destinies. Do you pursue a passion or follow a well-trodden path? Do you voice your disagreement in a conversation or remain silent? Personal freedom revolves around such choices. It’s the autonomy to think, act, and live according to one’s beliefs without undue external influence. This freedom lets us be authentic, honoring our true selves.

Now, imagine living in a society that dictates what you should wear, whom you should marry, or which profession you should choose. Sounds restrictive, right? Societal freedom is the antidote. It focuses on a community’s collective rights, ensuring that cultural norms or societal pressures do not stifle individual choices. This freedom ensures a harmonious coexistence, celebrating diversity and promoting inclusivity.

While these freedoms might seem distinct, they often intertwine and influence each other. A country that values political freedom is more likely to uphold societal and personal freedoms. Similarly, a society that cherishes diverse beliefs will likely advocate for both personal and political freedoms.

However, with freedom comes responsibility. Just as a bird must know its strength to fly high, individuals and societies must understand the boundaries of freedom. It should empower, not harm. It should uplift, not suppress. True freedom respects and values the freedoms of others.

In conclusion, while freedom is a universal aspiration, its interpretation varies across political, personal, and societal domains. It’s the right to vote, the power to choose, and the ability to coexist. In understanding these nuances, we appreciate the true depth of freedom. It’s a reminder that while freedom is a right, it’s also a privilege, one that we must cherish, nurture, and protect. Whether it’s in the ballot box, the choices we make, or the societies we build, freedom is the foundation of progress, happiness, and harmony.

Follow us on Reddit for more insights and updates.

Comments (0)

Welcome to A*Help comments!

We’re all about debate and discussion at A*Help.

We value the diverse opinions of users, so you may find points of view that you don’t agree with. And that’s cool. However, there are certain things we’re not OK with: attempts to manipulate our data in any way, for example, or the posting of discriminative, offensive, hateful, or disparaging material.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

More from Definition Essay Examples and Samples

Oct 25 2023

What Is Identity? Definition Essay Sample

Oct 23 2023

What Is Respect? Definition Essay Example

Oct 20 2023

What Is a Home? Essay Definition Examples

Remember Me

What is your profession ? Student Teacher Writer Other

Forgotten Password?

Username or Email

‘Freedom’ Means Something Different to Liberals and Conservatives. Here’s How the Definition Split—And Why That Still Matters

W e tend to think of freedom as an emancipatory ideal—and with good reason. Throughout history, the desire to be free inspired countless marginalized groups to challenge the rule of political and economic elites. Liberty was the watchword of the Atlantic revolutionaries who, at the end of the 18th century, toppled autocratic kings, arrogant elites and ( in Haiti ) slaveholders, thus putting an end to the Old Regime. In the 19th and 20th centuries, Black civil rights activists and feminists fought for the expansion of democracy in the name of freedom, while populists and progressives struggled to put an end to the economic domination of workers.

While these groups had different objectives and ambitions, sometimes putting them at odds with one another, they all agreed that their main goal—freedom—required enhancing the people’s voice in government. When the late Rep. John Lewis called on Americans to “let freedom ring” , he was drawing on this tradition.

But there is another side to the story of freedom as well. Over the past 250 years, the cry for liberty has also been used by conservatives to defend elite interests. In their view, true freedom is not about collective control over government; it consists in the private enjoyment of one’s life and goods. From this perspective, preserving freedom has little to do with making government accountable to the people. Democratically elected majorities, conservatives point out, pose just as much, or even more of a threat to personal security and individual right—especially the right to property—as rapacious kings or greedy elites. This means that freedom can best be preserved by institutions that curb the power of those majorities, or simply by shrinking the sphere of government as much as possible.

This particular way of thinking about freedom was pioneered in the late 18th century by the defenders of the Old Regime. From the 1770s onward, as revolutionaries on both sides of the Atlantic rebelled in the name of liberty, a flood of pamphlets, treatises and newspaper articles appeared with titles such as Some Observations On Liberty , Civil Liberty Asserted or On the Liberty of the Citizen . Their authors vehemently denied that the Atlantic Revolutions would bring greater freedom. As, for instance, the Scottish philosopher Adam Ferguson—a staunch opponent of the American Revolution—explained, liberty consisted in the “security of our rights.” And from that perspective, the American colonists already were free, even though they lacked control over the way in which they were governed. As British subjects, they enjoyed “more security than was ever before enjoyed by any people.” This meant that the colonists’ liberty was best preserved by maintaining the status quo; their attempts to govern themselves could only end in anarchy and mob rule.

Get your history fix in one place: sign up for the weekly TIME History newsletter

In the course of the 19th century this view became widespread among European elites, who continued to vehemently oppose the advent of democracy. Benjamin Constant, one of Europe’s most celebrated political thinkers, rejected the example of the French revolutionaries, arguing that they had confused liberty with “participation in collective power.” Instead, freedom-lovers should look to the British constitution, where hierarchies were firmly entrenched. Here, Constant claimed, freedom, understood as “peaceful enjoyment and private independence,” was perfectly secure—even though less than five percent of British adults could vote. The Hungarian politician Józseph Eötvös, among many others, agreed. Writing in the wake of the brutally suppressed revolutions that rose against several European monarchies in 1848, he complained that the insurgents, battling for manhood suffrage, had confused liberty with “the principle of the people’s supremacy.” But such confusion could only lead to democratic despotism. True liberty—defined by Eötvös as respect for “well-earned rights”—could best be achieved by limiting state power as much as possible, not by democratization.

In the U.S., conservatives were likewise eager to claim that they, and they alone, were the true defenders of freedom. In the 1790s, some of the more extreme Federalists tried to counter the democratic gains of the preceding decade in the name of liberty. In the view of the staunch Federalist Noah Webster, for instance, it was a mistake to think that “to obtain liberty, and establish a free government, nothing was necessary but to get rid of kings, nobles, and priests.” To preserve true freedom—which Webster defined as the peaceful enjoyment of one’s life and property—popular power instead needed to be curbed, preferably by reserving the Senate for the wealthy. Yet such views were slower to gain traction in the United States than in Europe. To Webster’s dismay, overall, his contemporaries believed that freedom could best be preserved by extending democracy rather than by restricting popular control over government.

But by the end of the 19th century, conservative attempts to reclaim the concept of freedom did catch on. The abolition of slavery, rapid industrialization and mass migration from Europe expanded the agricultural and industrial working classes exponentially, as well as giving them greater political agency. This fueled increasing anxiety about popular government among American elites, who now began to claim that “mass democracy” posed a major threat to liberty, notably the right to property. Francis Parkman, scion of a powerful Boston family, was just one of a growing number of statesmen who raised doubts about the wisdom of universal suffrage, as “the masses of the nation … want equality more than they want liberty.”

William Graham Sumner, an influential Yale professor, likewise spoke for many when he warned of the advent of a new, democratic kind of despotism—a danger that could best be avoided by restricting the sphere of government as much as possible. “ Laissez faire ,” or, in blunt English, “mind your own business,” Sumner concluded, was “the doctrine of liberty.”

Being alert to this history can help us to understand why, today, people can use the same word—“freedom”—to mean two very different things. When conservative politicians like Rand Paul and advocacy groups FreedomWorks or the Federalist Society talk about their love of liberty, they usually mean something very different from civil rights activists like John Lewis—and from the revolutionaries, abolitionists and feminists in whose footsteps Lewis walked. Instead, they are channeling 19th century conservatives like Francis Parkman and William Graham Sumner, who believed that freedom is about protecting property rights—if need be, by obstructing democracy. Hundreds of years later, those two competing views of freedom remain largely unreconcilable.

Annelien de Dijn is the author of Freedom: An Unruly History , available now from Harvard University Press.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• Jane Fonda Champions Climate Action for Every Generation
• Biden’s Campaign Is In Trouble. Will the Turnaround Plan Work?
• Why We're Spending So Much Money Now
• The Financial Influencers Women Actually Want to Listen To
• Breaker Sunny Choi Is Heading to Paris
• Why TV Can’t Stop Making Silly Shows About Lady Journalists
• The Case for Wearing Shoes in the House
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

You May Also Like

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Personal Identity — What Personal Identity Means To Me

What Personal Identity Means to Me

• Categories: Personal Identity

About this sample

Words: 606 |

Published: Feb 9, 2022

Words: 606 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 555 words

1 pages / 398 words

3 pages / 1323 words

3 pages / 1484 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Personal Identity

History, often viewed as a distant narrative of the past, has a profound and lasting impact on individuals. In this essay on how history shapes who you are, we will explore the intricate relationship between historical events [...]

Exploring the depths of human existence, the question "what is your social identity?" leads us on a journey to uncover the intricate layers that shape our sense of self within the intricate tapestry of society. This essay delves [...]

Identity is a multifaceted concept that defines who we are as individuals. It is shaped by our experiences, values, beliefs, and how we perceive ourselves in the context of society. In this essay, I will delve into the concept [...]

Embarking on a journey of introspection, the question "what is your social identity?" propels us to delve into the depths of self-awareness and self-discovery. This essay endeavors to explore the profound significance of my [...]

In “Sonny’s blue”, from the perspective of narrator, the fiction expresses his observations of the world and his thinking about life by describing Sonny's experience. Also, the fiction depicts two very different lives by [...]

In conclusion, "Uncoiling" by Pat Mora is a powerful and evocative poem that delves into the themes of identity, self-discovery, and cultural heritage. Through vivid imagery, symbolic elements, and poetic techniques, Mora [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Undergraduate
• High School
• Architecture
• American History
• Asian History
• Antique Literature
• American Literature
• Asian Literature
• Classic English Literature
• World Literature
• Creative Writing
• Linguistics
• Criminal Justice
• Legal Issues
• Anthropology
• Archaeology
• Political Science
• World Affairs
• African-American Studies
• East European Studies
• Latin-American Studies
• Native-American Studies
• West European Studies
• Family and Consumer Science
• Social Issues
• Women and Gender Studies
• Social Work
• Natural Sciences
• Pharmacology
• Earth science
• Agriculture
• Agricultural Studies
• Computer Science
• IT Management
• Mathematics
• Investments
• Engineering and Technology
• Engineering
• Aeronautics
• Medicine and Health
• Alternative Medicine
• Communications and Media
• Advertising
• Communication Strategies
• Public Relations
• Educational Theories
• Teacher's Career
• Chicago/Turabian
• Company Analysis
• Education Theories
• Shakespeare
• Canadian Studies
• Food Safety
• Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition
• Movie Review
• Admission Essay
• Annotated Bibliography
• Application Essay
• Article Critique
• Article Review
• Article Writing
• Book Review
• Business Plan
• Business Proposal
• Capstone Project
• Cover Letter
• Creative Essay
• Dissertation
• Dissertation - Abstract
• Dissertation - Conclusion
• Dissertation - Discussion
• Dissertation - Hypothesis
• Dissertation - Introduction
• Dissertation - Literature
• Dissertation - Methodology
• Dissertation - Results
• GCSE Coursework
• Grant Proposal
• Marketing Plan
• Multiple Choice Quiz
• Personal Statement
• Power Point Presentation
• Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes
• Questionnaire
• Reaction Paper

Research Paper

• Research Proposal
• SWOT analysis
• Thesis Paper
• Online Quiz
• Literature Review
• Movie Analysis
• Statistics problem
• Math Problem
• All papers examples
• How It Works
• Money Back Policy
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• We Are Hiring

My Identity, Essay Example

Pages: 6

Words: 1597

Hire a Writer for Custom Essay

Use 10% Off Discount: "custom10" in 1 Click 👇

You are free to use it as an inspiration or a source for your own work.

Both process unity and object unity are definitions, describing a living being from two different sides. While process unity comprises every event of our life, it is not our memories, but we are, created by situations and our emotions, thoughts and therefore actions, experience and conclusions. One can imagine a person as tabula rasa. We start moving according to our initial position and background here and there and change ourselves through our lifetime, where every event is a chain link in our personality.

This path is long and complicated, it has several stages, some of them we simply do not realize (especially in early childhood), some we can rule in order to change ourselves – and our lifeline. While getting experience we pattern ourselves on parents, environment. After the birth emotions are simple and selfish, children do not know any complicated reactions and possess any skills, but they learn to interact, to copy friends’ and parents’ behavior patterns. And still it does not mean that they become a copy of people they know, but a unique living being because of his or her special position and a compilation of genetic and acquired traits. Environment provides a person, tabula rasa, with necessary examples and tools of world and self- study. That is why we won’t be able to exist as thinking being without society. We are being created and developed by it; a person is like a branch of a big tree, it belongs to it and resembles other branches but still it is the only one.

Our own experience has a great importance to our following life as it influences our future, and our future events compose our process unity. Previous experience plays a role of a prophet as it drops a hint how to communicate, what to do and what is to come if you do. Rich experience helps to eliminate possible conflicts, lack of experience leads us to unknown situations where we are to decide, to chose, to get new emotions and thoughts for shaping our personality more thoroughly. And so we are tracing our path.

Communication with other people plays the leading role in this shaping. For example, school simply teaches facts and values. While schooling a person learns to interact by sharing and borrowing points of view, hobbies and habits. It does not only make you remember values you must know, but  get wise to and appreciate them due to situations you come across. Communication teaches to compare ourselves with others, therefore analyze different characters.

We don’t only look at people to judge them, but are always asking questions whether we want to be like them or not. Being adopted, I know little of my genetic makeup or the objects that shaped my physical characteristics. Viewing object unity as Rose defines it, the one physical characteristic I can point to is being much shorter than the rest of my family. But I can relate far more to process unity, as the relationships in my life have had a far greater impact on making me who I am. My interaction with my mother helped to teach me creativity and patience. My interaction with my father helped to teach me to work hard and not accept being as good as anyone else. He taught me to always be better. We develop this or that way depending on people we meet and experience we get.

No communication at all means no changes in our personality while good communication provides us with examples of good and bad, of what we desire to be, what we desire to have, what we never want to happen on. Such an experience makes us not only to move in a certain direction (if we speak about company, friends and material things), but change our characters. We must have sources and examples of different human behavior, personality and values in order to identify ourselves. One’s personality is often interpreted by those we interact with, the person has their own vision of their personality, called self concept, which may or may not be the same has how others view us (Consumer Buying Behavior).

According to this, it is possible to assert that our mind becomes a unique organism with its rules of perceptions and reactions.

This statement leaves no doubt that two living beings could be similar. But at the same time object unity means that all the people have something common not only because of their physical affinity but because being humans and possessing similar ways of their reactions – perceiving, thinking, remembering, imagining. They do not depend on experience or personality. Object unity is a kind of a link that helps us to understand each other, no matter how different we are in our identity, it’s just because our brain has some properties that are common for all the people.

According to the definition of object unity, we can count on a universal system of well-known for a certain society symbols and interactions one can use. (It is a pity that in our consumer society this perception is greatly contracted, for instance, to simple logical chains “he has a car – he is rich”, “he drinks – he is unhappy” or “she is beautiful – she wants to marry a rich man”. We forget to keep in mind process unity that means that a person is much more than simply an image).

These two definitions may seem to contradict each other, because the first one proves an absolute originality of a person and the other insists on some identical methods of thinking. Linking each of two these definitions with mass culture one can draw two extremely different conclusions. Either different people can be affected in the same way, because they have the same perception by default, or they cannot, because the methods of perceptions range from personality.

I guess we definitely can draw a line between two definitions. We know about colors influence us. Red energizes and can be used in advertisement to attract our attention. That is object unity. But using red doesn’t guarantee success. People are different, some like this color, some tired of it, so, no matter what the influence is, the reaction will be different. That is process unity. One person may be able to focus very strongly on a certain advertisement and be able to retain the information after being exposed only one time while another person may need to be exposed to the same advertisement many times before he/she even recognizes what it is (Consumer Buying Behavior).

Surely, we can be divided into several groups according to our tastes, and consumer society did it. It has two sides. On the one hand, it helps to satisfy every our need. On the other, it simplifies human perception by developing a universal symbol system and doesn’t look at individuality; it produces goods for an average person and identity turns out to be replaced by these symbols.

Yet our society has certain advantages, for instance, external similarity makes an illusionary impression of understanding other people and being understood, no matter that thinking processes may be different.  But if we concentrate only on external side soon we will realize that we are miserable and unhappy, because we have nothing inside us and aren’t able to interact with people on higher levels. Consumer society encourages financial aspiration and enslaves weak people who want to be fashionable. It requires being rich and beautiful and children grow up thinking that to be happy means to have status symbols and keep up appearances. They are rarely interested in skills and values they should have. It doesn’t mean that we mustn’t care about our appearance; it should be connected with our true personality.

Nowadays we seldom look at a complicated pattern of identity. Moreover, we try to judge people by their appearance and it seems to be productive, because we have enough knowledge about this symbol system. We can say something about taste, fashion, self-confidence, prosperity, work and even hobbies or character. It’s convenient while we won’t be able to take each other for unique in everyday communication. But looking only at an image we shouldn’t forget that personality can be shown quite poorly because of business suit.

When I shop, I buy very expensive clothes. When looking for a car, I could simply have bought a Hyundai and saved a lot of money. Instead, I chose to buy a Mercedes. I am single and have no need for a 3000 square foot home. But when people visit, I want them to be impressed. All of these material items were purchased based on the reaction I would receive from society.

But, I would like to think I am more than just materialistic. My self-identity comes from people that have had positive effects on me. Had I not been influenced by my father, I wouldn’t possess the work ethic I have today. Had my mother not taught music to me, I would lack creativity. So, my identity isn’t simply what I wear. Nor is it what I possess on the inside. Combined, though, they make me who I am.

That is the idea one should constantly keep in mind. We should be judged on our things as well as on our actings. As it is impossible to follow a person everywhere or to read his or her thoughts in order to find out that we are really different, one can simply remember that the people we meet are not only typical images in our consumer society. They are the same unique as we are in the way of feeling and thinking.

Works Cited

Consumer Buying Behavior . 20 Nov. 2008. 7 Apr. 2009. <http://www.knowthis.com/tutorials/principles-of-marketing/consumer-buying-behavior.htm>

Stuck with your Essay?

Get in touch with one of our experts for instant help!

Bipolar Disorder and Marriage, Research Paper Example

Emma’s Transformation in Jean Austen’s Novel “Emma”, Essay Example

Time is precious

don’t waste it!

Plagiarism-free guarantee

Privacy guarantee

Secure checkout

Money back guarantee

Related Essay Samples & Examples

Voting as a civic responsibility, essay example.

Pages: 1

Words: 287

Utilitarianism and Its Applications, Essay Example

Words: 356

The Age-Related Changes of the Older Person, Essay Example

Pages: 2

Words: 448

The Problems ESOL Teachers Face, Essay Example

Pages: 8

Words: 2293

Should English Be the Primary Language? Essay Example

Pages: 4

Words: 999

The Term “Social Construction of Reality”, Essay Example

Words: 371

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

A Proclamation on Transgender Day of Visibility,   2024

On Transgender Day of Visibility, we honor the extraordinary courage and contributions of transgender Americans and reaffirm our Nation’s commitment to forming a more perfect Union — where all people are created equal and treated equally throughout their lives.  

I am proud that my Administration has stood for justice from the start, working to ensure that the LGBTQI+ community can live openly, in safety, with dignity and respect.  I am proud to have appointed transgender leaders to my Administration and to have ended the ban on transgender Americans serving openly in our military.  I am proud to have signed historic Executive Orders that strengthen civil rights protections in housing, employment, health care, education, the justice system, and more.  I am proud to have signed the Respect for Marriage Act into law, ensuring that every American can marry the person they love. 

Transgender Americans are part of the fabric of our Nation.  Whether serving their communities or in the military, raising families or running businesses, they help America thrive.  They deserve, and are entitled to, the same rights and freedoms as every other American, including the most fundamental freedom to be their true selves.  But extremists are proposing hundreds of hateful laws that target and terrify transgender kids and their families — silencing teachers; banning books; and even threatening parents, doctors, and nurses with prison for helping parents get care for their children.  These bills attack our most basic American values:  the freedom to be yourself, the freedom to make your own health care decisions, and even the right to raise your own child.  It is no surprise that the bullying and discrimination that transgender Americans face is worsening our Nation’s mental health crisis, leading half of transgender youth to consider suicide in the past year.  At the same time, an epidemic of violence against transgender women and girls, especially women and girls of color, continues to take too many lives.  Let me be clear:  All of these attacks are un-American and must end.  No one should have to be brave just to be themselves.  

At the same time, my Administration is working to stop the bullying and harassment of transgender children and their families.  The Department of Justice has taken action to push back against extreme and un-American State laws targeting transgender youth and their families and the Department of Justice is partnering with law enforcement and community groups to combat hate and violence.  My Administration is also providing dedicated emergency mental health support through our nationwide suicide and crisis lifeline — any LGBTQI+ young person in need can call “988” and press “3” to speak with a counselor trained to support them.  We are making public services more accessible for transgender Americans, including with more inclusive passports and easier access to Social Security benefits.  There is much more to do.  I continue to call on the Congress to pass the Equality Act, to codify civil rights protections for all LGBTQI+ Americans.

Today, we send a message to all transgender Americans:  You are loved.  You are heard.  You are understood.  You belong.  You are America, and my entire Administration and I have your back.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim March 31, 2024, as Transgender Day of Visibility.  I call upon all Americans to join us in lifting up the lives and voices of transgender people throughout our Nation and to work toward eliminating violence and discrimination based on gender identity.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twenty-ninth day of March, in the year of our Lord two thousand twenty-four, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-eighth.

                             JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR.

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.