Kazuya Hihama's high school stage summary - the third

Freedom is a basic value that everyone aspires to, and I don't understand why many people would laugh at a value that exists as a value in itself, at least, in my opinion, the yearning for personal freedom and making personal self-control should be expected by everyone.

One of the most common things people say about individual freedom is that "freedom is not unlimited", and that's certainly fine – however, all the people who say it are as if they have gained enough freedom, or rather, as if they feel they have been free.

In fact, freedom is more difficult than one might think, and it's harder to make oneself than one might think.

I mentioned earlier that Minister Iizuka misjudged the situation when he blindly relied on Kitahara's predecessors and gave up thinking, which was a sign of unfreedom. From his point of view, he didn't necessarily know how to make a decision that was best for himself, but he gave up the opportunity to make that decision because of his habitual trust in Haruki Kitahara and the belief that "Haruki Kitahara must be able to solve the problem better than Takeya Iizuka" made him give up his choice. Of course, many people may think that Minister Iizuka's behavior is just a personal act, and they will certainly not make similar decisions themselves, and perhaps some people will think that Minister Iizuka did not make a mistake, after all, it is better to leave the problem to a professional than to do it yourself.

However, I would like to emphasize that Minister Iizuka "did not think about it", and although the result is the same, the operation process in the middle is different, and there is an essential difference. Giving the choice to others after thinking, and giving the choice to others without thinking, is a process of establishing or not self-control. Without thinking about it, this cannot be called personal freedom.

However, what is even more terrifying is that there are even more people who, after thinking about it, are still unable to achieve self-control - yes, I would say Rumi Tsurumi. I have already told Tsurumi about her future, and Tsurumi has a clear understanding of her future, however, she has actively chosen the future that allows self-deprecation and self-worth to be unrevealed—just because she needs to adapt to the collective and the social environment.

So, is Tsurumi, who made her own choice and chose to abandon her own freedom, free? I must say that she is not free because she does not respect her own heart to make her own judgment, even if it is her own judgment. If it weren't for the persecution of the social environment, if it weren't for the constraints of all kinds of pressures, Tsurumi would not have made this choice.

The choice they make after thinking about it is the free choice of self-domination, and this proposition itself is a false proposition, so if you want to ask why, ask the people of those totalitarian countries? They have chosen to obey the leader, and this is their own choice, but who dares to say that these practices of theirs are their own ideas?

Therefore, through Tsurumi Rumi, we know that even if a person is able to make a judgment through his own thinking, a large social environment and a large living conditions will hinder an individual from making a true and free judgment.

So, what if you are in a free environment that is not bound to you, and at this time, the choices you make through personal thinking must be free?

The answer to this question is given by Fuyuma and Sasa. Fuyuma and Sasa, who blindly follow her mother's back, and Fuyuma and Sasa, who will be disheartened by her mother's words without any coercive force, these choices she makes are of course the result of her own thinking, but this is still not a free choice.

Fuyuma and Sasa's nature is to like the piano, which can be judged after a short conversation with her, however, she forcibly suppresses her own nature because Ichichi has no coercion over herself, and why, because her sensibility as a pianist suppresses reason, because she can't use her reason to think about what she needs most, what she likes most, and what she wants most, which makes her what she is now. Even after I pointed this out, she was still unable to overcome her feelings with reason, which further proves that for many people, they are still not free if they do not have good control over the blinding of their feelings to self-domination in the decision-making process.

Therefore, the conclusion is that the discussion of freedom should not be a discussion of the degree of freedom, but a discussion of the existence or absence of freedom.

First of all, some people will give up the opportunity to think for themselves, which is already the most typical situation of losing freedom; secondly, in the case of people thinking for themselves, the environmental pressure of society may force you to make a choice that goes against your nature, which is also unfree; finally, even without the environmental pressure of society, human beings themselves are often unable to overcome their emotional shortcomings, reason is replaced by emotion, and make impulsive decisions, which is of course also a manifestation of unfreedom.

The answer is very simple: when people don't know that they are not free, let other people tell them what your heart is? This may be arrogant and arrogant, but the theory that "the authorities are confused, and the bystanders are clear" will never become obsolete at any time.

Of course, as an outsider, it is necessary to judge how the original intention of other people is naturally unable to achieve all kinds of mistakes, however, on the basis that others have already made incorrect judgments, replacing one incorrect judgment with another incorrect judgment will not be weakened from a utilitarian point of view.

Then, for rational people, the next choice is very simple, bring in the unfree and irrational other party, think, think rationally, and then, put forward their own suggestions.

It's not about solving problems for the other person, but in a sense, it's similar to the purpose of the Ministry of Minister, which is to tell the other person what you really want, and then let the other person understand what they should do.

---------------------------------PS--------------------------------

The end of the volume is routine nonsense, and I think this chapter is still relatively easy for me to understand, and it can be regarded as a systematic summary of the logic of the protagonist's reversal. There's also,I'm asking for a ticket.,When you owe more people, I admit it if you don't give a ticket.,Now I can be regarded as a daily change, hey.,To be honest,If the ticket is less, I don't feel like there's any mood to add more.,I won't add more to save the manuscript for the new pit during the summer vacation.,I'm really threatening!

And then it's,Although this chapter is only 2k,But I've actually written it for a long time.,If you don't think the word count is enough, then it's a chapter with the zero chapter of tomorrow's fourth volume.,This chapter doesn't count as a plus.。 If I think it's okay, then I only owe four watches, well.