Do you consider yourself a free person? What do you mean by this concept? It is quite possible that you are mistaken due to the wrong opinion that modern society has implanted in us since childhood. Let's break down who a real free person is.
A free person is devoid of fear of other people, he never considers his own from the perspective of the problem. No, he uses communication to its fullest, inspiring people to work.
He is a leader who is followed. Of course, he is always open to others, he can hear those who need it. But this does not mean that he will please everyone, only when it coincides with his plans.
A free person can always modernize his values and desires if he sees benefit in a new idea. Therefore, we can say that such a person is not biased and is not limited to his own little world.
Naturally, no material values have power over her. And this gives her additional freedom. A free person will not resolve disputes by force; there is no need for this: the main “weapon” is negotiations, in which he wins.
He can calmly spend his time and energy to find a way out of a difficult situation. A free person will never resort to deception or threats; on the contrary, such a person will interest people, and they themselves will go to resolve the conflict.
10 unique “commandments” were derived. Perhaps you should take note of them and introduce them into your life.
- My behavior and all its consequences are entirely my responsibility. I understand perfectly well what is bad and what is good.
- I have every right to leave my actions without explanation or apology. This is my choice and I have my reasons for it.
- Only I can determine the degree of my responsibility in relation to other people. Those around me are also not constrained in their choice, and any of their actions is their decision.
- I have the power to change my mind at any time. Again, no one has the right to tell me or allow me to.
- If I do it, then it is my right. I am not ideal and therefore I may well do the wrong thing. However, my mistakes are my experience.
- Like any real person, I cannot know absolutely everything. Therefore, at any moment you can hear me say “I don’t know!”
- I don't depend on other people's attitude towards me. The most important thing is my own attitude towards myself and it is excellent!
- If you don't see the logic in my actions and decisions, that's your problem. I know better what to do.
- I can say at any time that I do not understand my interlocutor. I don't need to pretend.
- I will never depend on other people's fashion and hobbies. If I like something, I will bring it into my life.
Watch this video right now
Society often talks about freedom; freedom of speech, personality, choice and many others. Everyone talks, but not everyone understands what it is - freedom.
But what exactly does this freedom consist of and does it mean that a free person should not be responsible for his freedom? It is these questions that we decided to discuss at our next round table.
Freedom, like any abstract concept, will evoke its own ideas and thoughts in each person.
In my opinion, freedom is not an external, but an internal state. For example, you can be married, but feel like a free person, free in the sense that you have the right to your opinion, your time, etc. And vice versa, being outwardly a free person, internally it was as if he himself had built a fence around himself from various prohibitions and beliefs.
Freedom is something that cannot be taken from us or given to us, without our desire. Freedom is an internal state!
Freedom is inextricably linked with responsibility; a person cannot be truly free if he does not take responsibility for his life, if he shifts it to people or circumstances.
Figuratively speaking, “I have the right to any action, thought and feeling, but for each of them I myself am responsible, I am responsible for what I do or do not do.”
Therefore, responsibility is one of the criteria of freedom!
Let us feel free and responsible for our lives!
Freedom of speech is when a society allows its members to express their thoughts. Provided that these statements do not offend other people, that this is not a threat, that this is respect.
If there is no freedom of speech in a society, then people become withdrawn and aggressive. If in society freedom of speech is understood as freedom to say stupid things, then society becomes stupid.
Freedom of speech is not the choice of an individual, it is the choice of society.
In general, I don’t really understand such general questions. They can be discussed endlessly, but there will be no result. Or it will be abstract, like the question itself.
Hello, dear readers, colleagues.
Being a free person means taking full responsibility for what happens in my life; for what has already happened in my life: how I live now, who and what surrounds me, how satisfied I am with what I have, how healthy and happy I am. Take full responsibility for the kind of life I am already creating for myself in the future, as they say, what goes around comes around: if you sow a lie, you will receive betrayal; sow greed - get poverty; sow indifference - get loneliness and so on. And in this understanding of freedom there is a lot of freedom of action, freedom of choice, freedom to live as I like and according to my laws - freedom to create my life without fear and reproach and without regard to other people’s opinions, but at the same time fitting harmoniously into the community of people and wisely using available social resources for your own benefit and sincerely sharing what you have achieved with others.
The more truly free people there are, the safer, more interesting and richer life is.
We are all initially FREE in our choice.
We are all responsible for our lives.
However, there are those who recognize their freedom and responsibility, and those who, for some reason, do not.
Freedom and responsibility are strongly interconnected.
From the recognition that ONLY YOU are responsible for YOUR life, and ONLY for your life! give you the FREEDOM to dispose of it as you wish, and not to waste energy on limiting the freedom of another person to one degree or another.
However, it is important to remember that FREEDOM OF CHOICE is the most precious thing a person has, we are endowed with this from birth. We are always free to CHOOSE. This is why it is so important to respect the freedom of choice of another person.
We make one CHOICE or another every day. Even leaving everything the same is a choice. Even thinking that we are not free IS a CHOICE.
An interesting observation: those people who recognize their freedom and responsibility usually show respect for the freedom of choice of other people, they do not impose their opinions, they always strive to give responsibility to a person for his life, but those who do not themselves recognize their freedom strive for this freedom limit others, and they also like to shift responsibility.
Only the recognitionthat you yourself created everything,what do you have in your life now?and attracted all events (responsibility),give you the opportunityit is ALL Change (freedom).
- Dependencies can be natural, such as food, sleep, clothing, etc.
- There are unnecessary addictions, for example, smoking, since it is not a natural activity for a person, but an acquired one.
- The human desire for freedom is the maximum desire to free ourselves from a greater number of dependencies with all our might. The desire for freedom is a good desire to be better.
I agree, the topic is philosophical. Everyone has their own measure of freedom. For one it is the freedom to speak the truth to the face of another, for another it is freedom of choice, and for the third it is a mirage, a pipe dream.
Freedom and responsibility, from my point of view, are interdependent concepts. The more free you are, the more responsibility you have.
But I am closer to the definition of freedom as “freedom want". This is the ability to choose a dress not because Armani or Dior showed this year “what you need to want,” but because I like it and it suits me. But, definitely, you will have to answer for your desire. At least before the “fashion verdict”:- )
The freedom to be yourself in general is a very unpopular thing these days. Standards, goals, images are hung in front of the population.
And that's the whole point! There is a huge difference between the phrases “I need to be successful” and “I want to be successful.” The second phrase exudes freedom, the first social conjuncture. Thus, I would also correlate the word freedom with the word " individuality".
And the last binding, freedom and life. I think that while a person is alive, he develops one or another measure of freedom. And only death does not need freedom.
For each person, the concept of “freedom” has its own meaning. For example, to be a free person means:
Be free from prejudice.
Be free from other people's opinions.
Be free from insults and criticism.
Don't be afraid of being misunderstood.
To be open.
To be the first - the first to make contact, the first to smile, the first to start a conversation, the first to express feelings.
Be free in your choice.
You can add to this the 5 FREEDOMS of Virginia Satir:
1. Freedom to see and hear what exists in the present moment here and now, and not what should be, was or will be.
2. Freedom to express what you think and feel, and not what others expect from you.
3. Freedom to feel what you feel, and not pretend.
4. Freedom to ask when you need something rather than wait for permission.
5. Freedom to take responsibility, to take risks, rather than choosing safety and not daring to do anything differently.
Liberty , This word, term, from time immemorial, has excited the great minds of mankind, and in the works of various thinkers one can find their own definition of this phenomenon. Much of these definitions will depend on the individual's personal characteristics and the many factors involved in the description.
Homo sapiens, in his quest to become free, has traveled such a long path of evolution that it seems that the fortress is about to collapse; whether this will actually be possible can only be known in the future, perhaps not as distant as it seems.
Freedom is a washed-out term that has absolutely lost its meaning in modern society. And everyone will give their own definition. But not everyone thinks about this. Maybe he is free who does not go into discussions about freedom? It seems to me that as soon as a person begins to think about freedom, it means that now something or someone is making him unfree. The concepts of freedom and unfreedom are connected with each other much stronger than it seems at first glance. For me, the main questions here are: how does a person make himself unfree and why? Sometimes a person cannot afford freedom and it is much calmer to be in some lack of freedom. The main thing is not to confuse lack of freedom and a feeling of attachment, the presence of connections with things and people.
The term Freedom has a rather vague definition and therefore, everyone who encounters it often has a subjective understanding. To begin with, let us note that there is external freedom, when someone either allows us something or limits it, and internal freedom, when we allow or limit it ourselves. Sometimes it happens that external and internal freedom coincide, then we have a complete scattering of thoughts and actions, but this marginal action can be avoided by having clear boundaries, which include responsibility for what we do or do not do. We allow or limit. It happens that external freedom dominates internal freedom and then we are faced with the limitations of our own capabilities and self-realization. We constantly find a stone in an empty place and thereby justify our inaction. But sometimes internal freedom prevails over external freedom, and here we see the syndrome of a revolutionary, such a pioneer who seeks the meaning of life in rebellion. And the last case is that there is neither external nor internal freedom - the so-called zone of permanent security. Where everything is always peaceful and calm. No creativity or creativity. Everything is within the established rules! And in the end I would like to say that the main thing in freedom is the ability to be who you are, i.e. To be youreself! And then both external and internal freedom will be synchronized and balanced!
Freedom is a theoretical concept, it cannot be touched, touched, smelled - it is something indefinite.
After all, we cannot give a clear definition of this phenomenon and say that freedom is this or that. It seems to me that few people can feel free. Since a truly free person is considered independent of either external or internal factors. Where can freedom come from in a world in which all existing phenomena are interconnected with each other and there is not a single being that is absolutely independent of anything?
For example, a child from birth depends on his mother, the mother, in turn, is attached to the child and is no longer free to manage her time as she would like, etc. A person depends on the society in which he lives, on a small and global scale, from the country to the working conditions. That is, it is possible to make a contrast between freedom and dependence. That is, a person is free to the extent that he has no dependencies of various kinds. This seems unrealistic to me. But this is if we talk about freedom in the global sense of the word - that is, in my opinion, this is an illusion that comes from the fact that a person thinks that he himself decides his own destiny and is free from any external and internal influences. That is, to paraphrase, we can say that a person is born so free that he is able to choose the degree of his slavery.
But in a more subjective sense, freedom seems more real when there is freedom from fear, and the most important human fear is the fear of death. Since, feeling the acceptance of death as an inevitable factor in any life, a person accepts life itself in the full degree of its freedom, which implies, first of all, openness to what is happening, acceptance of all aspects of life. Openness to yourself, your fears and complexes. Then there is an opportunity to see them closer and free yourself from them. Freedom is, first of all, to be natural, that is, to live in harmony with oneself, with the world. Live according to the dictates of your soul, so to speak, go your own way and be free from any prejudices, patterns, etc..
Of course, realizing his choice, a person accordingly accepts responsibility for it. Learning to hear and listen to yourself is the true freedom of a person. After all, a truly free person is a person without borders
“Man is free to be himself or to hide behind a façade, to move forward or backward, to act as a destructive destroyer of himself and others or to make himself and others stronger—he is literally free to live or die.” (K. Rogers) Wonderful words! Every person is free to choose his own path in life, because it is not for nothing that the Lord gave us this freedom. Only one thing is often forgotten. Responsibility for the choice always lies with the person himself! We ourselves choose our life partners, wives and husbands, and the person himself makes the choice to continue living with the one who beats and bullies or to leave. The problem of loneliness is often addressed. “Only married people are drawn to me,” I hear from clients... Or maybe, unconsciously, of course, the woman herself makes a choice in favor of just such a relationship? It’s easier this way and there’s no responsibility! And the task is to “realize” your unconscious choice and make another, conscious one! I always tell my clients: nothing will happen until you yourself want it." And this is also about the issue of freedom. Freedom to be yourself, freedom to be happy. How I want to live my life, who I want to be with, what I I want from life! A person is free to choose.. The main thing is not to forget about the price.. ...and in conclusion I want to quote one of my favorite poems. It seems to me that it is about freedom:
Everyone chooses a woman, a religion, a path for themselves.
To serve the devil or the prophet - everyone chooses for himself.
Everyone chooses their own word for love and prayer.
Everyone chooses a sword for a duel, a sword for battle.
Everyone chooses for themselves.
Shield and armor, staff and patches,
Everyone chooses the measure of final retribution for themselves.
Everyone chooses for themselves. I also choose - as best I can.
I have no complaints against anyone.
Everyone chooses for themselves.
An interesting question: are you a free person? Someone will say... yes, I'm free. But when he thinks about it, he will understand whether I’m really free. More precisely, what is freedom? Freedom is when a person is not tied to anything, and at any moment has the opportunity to do as he wants. Is this really so, and upon reflection, everyone will probably say no. No person on earth is absolutely free, we depend on family, work, environment. But if we speak in a high sense of the meaning of this word, then freedom is what is inside you, how you feel about yourself. That is, if you feel free, then you will bring this feeling into your life. Human freedom is a philosophical question, everyone will answer in their own way! As the song says, I am free, like a bird in the sky, I am free, I have forgotten what fear means! Can every person say that? Question and ellipsis......
Due to the fact that this is still a psychological portal, I think it is necessary to separate the concept of socio-political rights and freedoms from the psychological category of Freedom. These are slightly different things. As you know, the concept of Freedom is one of the key ones in existential psychology and psychotherapy. And it concludes:
First of all, freedom of a person to create his own life path ,
- human freedom to will, choose and act ;
And most importantly, from the point of view of psychotherapy, change .
In this sense, we are simply doomed to be Free. And Freedom is inseparable from Responsibility. Responsibility actually means authorship.
Being aware of your responsibility means to be aware of the creation by oneself of one’s “I”, one’s destiny, one’s troubles in life, one’s feelings, as well as one’s suffering, if any. But at the same time, we are responsible not only for actions, but also for our inaction, for refusing choices, from the opportunities that our Life offers us.
But often, instead of accepting this responsibility, a person gives up his freedom, replacing it with the desire to stubbornly blame other people or forces for his failures. And this search for those responsible often drags on for many years.
And this is precisely the case of a child’s idea of Freedom, the motto of which is the following: “It’s not me who is like this, this is Life like this”..." It is they: parents, educators, teachers, bosses, the world who are guilty of the fact that I am like this." ...
"Freedom comes through choice" - this is the main thesis, in my opinion. I can have almost limitless potential, theoretically master a lot of professions, visit many places, but if I don’t choose what of all this wealth I will realize at the moment, no movement will happen.
Freedom in this case will remain imaginary, it will be more likely thoughts and conversations about freedom, and not freedom itself. In this sense, making a choice is my responsibility, my way to realize my freedom in real life .
Also, in order to be fully free, paradoxically, it is important to understand the real boundaries of my personal freedom:
1.Temporal boundaries . There are 24 hours in a day, and no matter how much I want, there won’t be 48 or 72 of them. I can fill them with anything, but from this it is already clear that there is no smell of limitlessness here - there is a finite number of activities that I can do for this time. But the content of my day is already a matter of my responsibility.
2. Spatial boundaries - are closely related to the first point. I can't be in two places at once. I choose where to be and what to do.
3. Relationship boundaries - the most controversial point. Here the range of opinions is the widest, from limitless possibilities to acceptance of anything and everything. In my opinion, mine “freedom ends where the freedom of another begins” - Then there is no longer any arbitrariness, there is only dialogue and mutual agreements.
I can fall in love with a girl and make every effort to win her favor - this is my zone of freedom and responsibility. But I can not force to love herself is already a question of her freedom. Despite all my efforts, I may not receive reciprocal love.
And here lies a great danger - a person with ideas of unlimited freedom often begins to look for flaws in himself in such cases - after all, he is responsible for everything! Means Always must get the result that it was aimed at, otherwise something is wrong with it. These kinds of ideas in cognitive psychotherapy are called irrational - for their unrealism and dogmatism.
If I realize the real boundaries of my freedom and responsibility, I understand that I do not have to please everyone, but at the same time I realize that there is an area of my real capabilities - and within this area I make every effort to achieve my dreams.
And lastly, to the question of “does it mean that a free person should not be responsible for his freedom?” - in my opinion, a free person cannot but bear responsibility for his choice, at least in the form of readiness to receive the consequences of this choice. If this is not so, there is no freedom, the person simply avoids situations that have significant consequences for him, is engaged in self-restraint and, of course, is not free.
The question, it seems to me, has one more facet - whether a person must necessarily experience a feeling of guilt if he did not get the result he wanted. But here the answer is different - no, not necessarily. The feeling of guilt arises rather from an insufficient understanding of one’s real boundaries and the presence of ideas of omnipotence. If I realize the scope of my real, and not imaginary, capabilities, if I receive an undesirable result, I simply “work on my mistakes,” clarifying my personal contribution to the situation. The tools here can be very diverse - self-analysis, psychological counseling, personal psychotherapy, supervision and many others.
Thus, we move away from the simple dichotomy “I am free - I am not free” and get a real idea of our capabilities.
To feel like a free person, the most important prerequisite is to live together with people who love life. It is conveyed without any words or explanations and, of course, without any sermons about loving life. Freedom finds its expression in behavior rather than in ideas, in the tone of voice rather than in words. It is felt in the general atmosphere of a person or group, and not in certain principles and rules by which they organize their lives. Among warm, loving contacts with people during childhood; freedom and non-threat, teaching principles that lead to inner spiritual strength, by example rather than by moral teaching; introduction to the "art of living"; lively exchange with other people and an arrangement of life determined by genuine interests.
Freedom can be physical and spiritual (or psychological). Physical freedom from bondage and “golden” cages. Psychological freedom is independence in one’s feelings, desires, goals and expectations.
It is possible to raise an independent person. To do this, parents must maintain adequate self-esteem for the child, trust the child and give him maximum independence. An independent (free) person is responsible for his own life, for his choices, for his own affairs.
In freedom there is strength and flight of fancy,
Space for thoughts, creativity of the soul...
She does not tolerate overt relationships,
Her palace is in the rapturous wilderness!
But there is no freedom if fear is in power.
She is a mirage of fear under its wing!
Such “freedom” does not know happiness
In a crystal clear blue sky.
Freedom is vulnerable and vulnerable,
And it's very hard to be free,
After all, life often passes by,
Look, loneliness has come...
In great love its mighty source,
As God's Gift in our hectic age...
Even if you are not always lucky in everything,
But only in freedom is a person happy!
Kuvaev Sergey
When a person is in harmony with happiness and unhappiness, with innocence and guilt, with health and illness, with life and death, new opportunities open up for him. Thanks to this consent, he receives knowledge and strength, he receives freedom.
A parable that explains the principle of such agreement.
The student asked the sage: “Tell me, what is freedom?”
“What freedom? - answered the sage. — Freedom comes in different forms.
First freedom- stupidity. She is like a horse that, rearing up, throws off its rider. Because of this, the horse will then have to feel the rider’s firm hand on him more strongly.
Second freedom- repentance. She is like a helmsman who remains on a sinking ship instead of going into the lifeboat.
AND third freedom- cognition. She comes to us after stupidity and repentance. She is like a stem that sways in the wind, but does not break because it is flexible.”
"And it's all?" - the student was surprised.
Then the sage answered him: “Others believe that it is they themselves who seek the truth in their souls. But it is the Big Soul that thinks and seeks through them.Like nature, it can allow itself to be mistaken; it continuously and effortlessly replaces bad players with new ones. To the same person who allows her to think, she provides some freedom of action and, like a swimmer who allows himself to be carried by the river, brings him to the shore with common efforts.”
Good day everyone!
A very interesting topic - freedom! Yes, of course, this is a whole philosophy: you can argue long and floridly. I would like to talk about the origins of that inner freedom, which, in my opinion, makes a person happy and self-sufficient. Now the baby is born and as he grows, he increasingly has the opportunity to take some action of his choice. And then... the adult nearby determines what and how the child needs to do for his own good. Of course, you need to take into account the safety aspect and try to create the safest possible environment in advance, and then give the little person the opportunity to determine and choose the area of research. At this stage, it is very important for adults to be patient and add responsibility to the possibility of choice without comment (well, I told you so, well, what did I get, etc.).
I would not like to talk about freedom as a social, philosophical category. I won’t bring the word “spirituality” into this topic either, since its meaning is not very clear to me.
I would like to talk about freedom as a basic value in the direction of psychotherapy in which I work.
I am sure that we can only live when we choose. Otherwise, the retained energy from the lack of freedom of choice makes our life dead. In this case, I do not consider choice as an assessment and rational approach to different alternatives. I consider choice as a mental act, absolutely holistic, not based on any grounds.
Such an act is necessarily accompanied by anxiety. And freedom lies precisely in not avoiding this anxiety, but experiencing it, having the courage to remain in it, to manage your life in it. It is at the moment when we begin to justify and evaluate our choice that we lose freedom.
I resonate with the position of Anastasia Vladimirovna Sapozhnikova, who asks the question “How does a person make himself unfree and why?” This is both a human and professional issue. And it seems to me that trying to rationalize, philosophize about your choice is one of the ways to avoid anxiety, a way not to worry about your choice, and therefore not to be free.
As for responsibility, even here in our time a person has no freedom. From early childhood, we are all told about responsibility, and society has long been making a choice for us in this sense: responsibility is an obligation towards one’s life. It is cruel to call for responsibility on people who are already obliged to bear this responsibility based on their upbringing, the requirements of society, and laws. Where is the choice, where is the freedom? I'm not surprised that many people try to avoid this responsibility.
Freedom can only appear when responsibility is not a duty, but a right. What is most interesting is that as soon as a person realizes responsibility as a right (the public is in panic, this is a duty!!!), the person begins to feel his own internal ethical code, trust in which is the main regulator of relationships.
Freedom is not expressed in responsibility as an obligation, it is expressed in responsibility as an opportunity and a right.
Regarding this, the parable about stupidity, repentance and knowledge, told by Beshiga Alena Valentinovna, resonates with me. Yes, nature can allow itself to be mistaken, it tries, it searches, it lives. There are only two options left for us. We trust her, and live, experiencing existential anxiety, but remaining true to ourselves. Either we run away from this anxiety, and lose our freedom to live, hiding behind masks and protecting ourselves with all sorts of concepts regarding ourselves, others and the world as a whole.
The question of freedom is eternally open, not fully defined - it will be significant at all times for a person who is able to realize, desire, achieve goals, and defend his individuality. And the more deeply he realizes himself as a person, internally free, independently thinking, responsible for his actions, a person included in culture, the more acutely he experiences the contradiction between “I am free” and “I am not free.”
Freedom is the spiritual air of man. A culture without freedom is an imaginary culture. An uncultured person usually perceives it as a call to arbitrariness and permissiveness.
Previously, the word freedom was considered as the right to control one’s destiny and was a legal concept. It originally indicated a person born to free parents, not from slaves. But being born free does not mean remaining that way. To stay, you need to know yourself, learn to control yourself, manage your habits (including bad ones). After all, it is freedom that distinguishes a person from an animal. A person is able to break the rigid “stimulus-response” chain that fetters animals. The stimulus can be hunger, sexual desires, etc. If a predator experiences hunger, then we can say that hunger is the predator. The predator is attraction itself. But it’s impossible to talk about a person like that. A person is a being who can always say “no” to his desires and does not have to always say “yes” to them, unless, of course, he has a healthy psyche.
A person can increase the degree of his freedom. The more mentally healthy he becomes, the higher his ability to constructively build his life, the better he is able to manage the potential of freedom that he has. So when a therapist helps a client overcome his personal difficulties, he is actually helping him find greater freedom.
The topic of freedom is very important in therapy, because everyone’s understanding of freedom and their relationship with the world is very individual. In the deep experiences of this concept lies both enormous life potential and inexhaustible anxiety and tension. Freedom is always opportunities - to want, choose and act. And all together means the opportunity to change, which is the goal of our work with clients. It is freedom that provides the necessary strength for changes in life.
“The Apostle said: “Everything is permitted to me, but not everything is beneficial... I can possess everything, but not everything must possess me.” Freedom is limited by the external world, freedom is limited by the inner world of a person, freedom is limited by the person himself. Freedom is not captured, not won, not obtained as a gift, for nothing. Freedom is born in accordance with our internal processes of the soul... You have to pay for everything: for your freedom, for the freedom of others, for safety.
Free is the one who has control over his choice, who is aware of the consequences of his choice and does not look for those to blame when something goes wrong, who is able to bear responsibility for all his decisions. Those. freedom is the state of an adult, mature, cultural personality.
Freedom, if we consider it in a specific psychological, and not a general philosophical sense, is a deeply subjective phenomenon, and this was noted by all the colleagues who spoke.
In the practice of psychological counseling, the question of freedom arises primarily in connection with three topics:
Liberation from various kinds of addictions;
Overcoming codependency;
- depression after divorce/breakup with a loved one.
In each of these cases, behind the unique ways in which work with a particular person occurs, the leitmotif is the person’s discovery of his own unique path to liberation. And in each such work, the turning point is when a person understands that his path to freedom begins not with a change in the current circumstances or the attitude of other people towards him, but with a change in his attitude towards the current circumstances and towards other people. This moment is essentially the discovery of what V. Frankl, in his extraordinary book “Man’s Search for Meaning,” called “the last freedom of man,” which no one and nothing can take away from him.
This “last” freedom, recognized by both the ancient Stoics and modern existentialists, is revealed in Frankl’s narrative through the extremely dramatic content of his autobiographical experience of being in a German concentration camp during the Second World War, “where every detail of camp life was aimed at to deprive the prisoner of the slightest support.”
The prisoners were just average, ordinary people, but some of them proved that man is capable of rising above his external fate. Frankl writes that those who were more likely to survive these inhuman efforts were not those who were physically stronger and healthier, but those who had a very strong human sense for survival. This could be the purpose of finding someone who remained outside the camp, completing a life's work begun, participating in underground anti-fascist work, or helping fellow prisoners.
Helping a person discover his “last”, or rather first, basic, original human freedom, which is the strongest, and sometimes the only support when solving the problem of coping with a difficult life situation - this, by and large, is the main psychotherapeutic task.
What makes a person free? Each of us has asked ourselves this question at least once. There are many definitions of the concept of “freedom”, as well as a huge number of points of view on the topic of who he is - a free person, what are the criteria for this state. Let's try to figure it out.
Freedom can be viewed from different perspectives. A prisoner in prison is far from free, because he cannot leave the confines of his cell, but a journalist, quietly traveling around the country, also complains of harassment. His freedom of speech is being taken away. Here is a teacher in a rural school. He is constrained by material problems and is forced to constantly think about how to feed himself and his family. What kind of freedom are we talking about? However, a successful businessman is also a hostage to circumstances - the state does not allow him to develop his business, it puts spokes in his wheels.
There are many more similar examples that can be given. All these are external reasons for our lack of freedom. This is how society and the whole world work. Created for the benefit of man, he gradually turns him into his slave. Conventions and rules put pressure on people from all sides, often penetrating not only into the external manifestations of our lives, but also into every person, not giving him the opportunity to realize one of his main freedoms - freedom of thought.
It seems that what could be simpler than free thought? Nobody can stop you from thinking. Even if your brain generates ideas that are unreliable from the point of view of the government, society or family, no one will know about it (unless, of course, you yourself tell everyone about them). But what is the problem then, why is freedom of thought so important?
“Freedom has nothing to do with the outside world. True freedom is not political, not economic: it is spiritual. It is not in your hands. And what is not in your hands cannot be called true freedom.”
These are the words of Osho, and it is difficult to disagree with them. What makes a person free? It is difficult to live without money, it gives a certain freedom, but funds can easily disappear. You can leave the state that oppresses you, but this does not mean that everything will be smooth in another country. Achieve the right to say openly everything you think? Achievable, but there are pitfalls here too. Everything that happens inside us cannot be taken away, spoiled, lost, unless we ourselves want it. A free person is an internally unlimited individual who is in harmony with himself and the world.
Here we come to the most interesting and important point of our reasoning. What makes a person free? We saw that the keys to the desired state are within us. But what can stop you from using them?
There is an opinion that the main enemy in a person’s achievement of freedom is the ideas he has accepted as a given (most often in the process of upbringing and education). These are external conditionings that have been transformed into him but in fact have no relation to what he really wants, feels and thinks. It is not so important what message these ideas carry, positive or negative. If a person does not understand that it is not him, but only a thought, an idea, he cannot become free.
It is not at all necessary to give up your beliefs, you just need to realize them. This applies to childhood complexes that prevent us from developing, and to religious ideas that prevent us from understanding what we really believe in, and to our schemes regarding the correct life. Because of the latter, we are often in constant planning for the future, forgetting about the present, striving not for what we want and can, but for what we for some reason should want.
What makes a person free? We have found the answer. Self-awareness separate from ideas, self-search, inner work. You need to constantly be aware of yourself, not act mechanically, be here and now. This is true freedom.
Cheating is an inexhaustible topic for psychologists and, of course, for gossip. Remember the expression: if they cheated on you, be glad that they cheated on you and not your Motherland? And if betrayal of the Motherland can still be explained, then relationships in a couple are not always subject to logic. For example, why does a married woman need another man? Aren't there enough problems with your husband? It’s paradoxical, but that’s why it’s needed because the problems are through the roof.
There are many reasons for female adultery, but we will not dwell here. Let's just say that unfree lovers are unlikely to get men to go to the theater together. Lack of attention and other things play a huge role in a woman’s life, but the decisive factor, no matter how you look at it, remains sex.
Let's say more - not all beautiful ladies are embarrassed by having relationships with two partners at the same time. Some even find it funny. Either the concept of fidelity seems very vague to them, or fidelity is so boring that it’s time to get rid of it.
But neither one nor the other, entering into a forbidden relationship, ever thinks about the main thing - the consequences. Who would think about what life would be like in a month of meetings when going to bed with a passionate friend? And who thinks how to behave correctly with the same friend in order to maintain or break the connection?
The consequences that a married mistress of a married man will face can be very different. Recommendations are inappropriate here. However, if you are already the main connecting corner of a love triangle, then there are some tips for you. They concern not only how to behave with your partner, but also your personal feelings. For example, how not to get lost in the world of fidelity and betrayal that you yourself created. Let's talk.
The first rule in a relationship with a lover is - if you're not sure, don't start.
Remember, the famous Sherlock Holmes said: “She was smart! You are no match for her!” What was he talking about? About a lady’s ability to be successfully married and at the same time live for her own pleasure.
They say that wise people simply physically cannot find themselves in a situation “between two fires.” Lies. It happens that even the smartest lady has no idea which relationship is a fatal mistake - with her husband or with her lover. Therefore, intelligence is the first thing a girl needs to have. It will help you not to go crazy while tossing and changing beds.
Second, remember the details. “A liar must have an excellent memory,” said Jerzy Lec. Lying is unpleasant and immoral, but in this situation lying cannot be avoided. A lady who gets involved in the game will have to use all her skills - intuition, cunning, insight, discernment in people. Therefore, if you are married, first think about whether you have the strength and patience to play a double game. Also think about what you will do if the secret becomes public knowledge.
Remember, betrayal is a painful fact not only for those who are betrayed. Not everyone can make a deal with their own conscience, as well as with instilled ethical rules. We can say that only a few people have this quality. After all, the lady will have to:
- Lie without blushing to someone who trusts (spouse).
- Run away from the bed of the one you love in time.
- To be torn into two parts, without feeling complete freedom, peace and tranquility.
- Be silent and be silent again, swallowing your own sadness
So now you are not free in emotions and actions. You need to master self-control and an accommodating conscience is the first necessary attribute of the women's game. Silence is the second. Otherwise, snotty confessions about your infidelity (to your husband) or playful flirting with hints that, they say, I’m married and you won’t get me (to your boyfriend) will ruin all your plans. Men who take revelations and flirting calmly are one in a million. The rest are owners. And even if this contradicts personal freedom and civilized norms, it is so.
Therefore, tormented by remorse, think carefully - who needs your confessions? Will such tactics direct the situation in a positive direction? What will you do if everything opens up?
Keep quiet, don't get distracted, take precautions
Married women experience repentant sinner syndrome from time to time. In order to somehow extinguish it, you need to create a picture exactly the opposite - imagine yourself in the place of the faithful. For example, he comes to you and sincerely admits to treason. Who has it worse? Of course, you. The spouse exhales with relief - he is finally freed from the burden, and you take the whole burden upon yourself. Moreover, the responsibility for deciding whether to continue living with an infidel is on your shoulders.
And now another (gentle) picture - you are silent, the romance ends, everything gets better, no one suffers. Describe these situations to yourself in more detail and re-read the text during “tearful exacerbations.”
If both lovers are not free and experience a strong feeling of guilt, we can talk about it. After the conversation, relief comes. But it is recommended to open your soul if both trust each other and, naturally, not talk about it at every convenient minute.
- Do not be distructed. When spending time with your lover, do not be distracted by thoughts about your beloved. And, especially, don’t be distracted by feelings of guilt! Also turn off all gadgets and force your partner to do the same. Otherwise, what's the point of dating? Agree, it’s funny if after sex a couple each turns to their phone, thus taking a break. Think about the owner. Show your partner that you belong entirely to him. At least during dating, this should be the impression. But don't forget about yourself. You deserve pleasure and calm nerves. Therefore, when spending time with others, forget about negative thoughts and learn to “turn off” your mind. Even if it’s only an hour, it’s not the quantity, but the quality of the time spent together that’s important.
- Respect your choice. After all, it’s not without reason that you dared to have a dual relationship. Respect the reasons why what happened happened. This is your own decision, may you be at a crossroads now.
- Keep yourself safe. The situation suggests some kind of bifurcation. But try not to give in to emotional division. Because in fact, you remain the same one woman. No matter what happens, remain intact.
- Protect yourself! Don't ignore this point. After all, good sex can end in a very bad diagnosis at an appointment with a venereologist or an unplanned pregnancy. Think about what you will say to your spouse if you suddenly become pregnant? And in general, what will your life be like after the birth of a child? In life, everything happens and it happens that even a short relationship between lovers ruins the lives of several people at once.
What is possible and what is not possible with your lover?
How to behave with your lover? Married and married lovers often make mistakes. At first glance, they are completely insignificant. But suddenly the moment comes when “the fly turns into an elephant,” and the novel is exposed literally out of nowhere.
What rules must be followed to keep relationships between lovers secret?
- The first ban. If you are in your inner circle of acquaintances, never flirt with a secret boyfriend. This category includes mutual friends, colleagues, relatives and anyone who knows you at least a little. It’s better to express your feelings exclusively in a love nest. It’s even better not to cross paths in such companies. You know that lovers can be seen from afar, right? You can be “figured out” even by looking at each other. Therefore, we repeat once again - turn on your mind and turn off your heart.
- Second, don’t bring flowers/gifts home if you can’t clearly explain to your spouse where they came from. It’s better to give your boyfriend a hint so that the surprises are justified - let him surprise you on your birthday. And you tell your beloved that your friends turned out to be very generous today.
- Third. Gentlemen sometimes wonder what the husbands of married mistresses are like? They are especially interested in the bed question. So - no comparisons. Discussing your spouse's abilities with anyone is bad form. And especially with another man. If a curious friend asks, remain silent, smile sweetly and think about the Maldives. And if he strongly insists, distract him physically - let him draw conclusions on his own.
- The fourth prohibition - if your lover is married, do not ask for details about his wife. If a lady is interested in such things, it means that she is not entirely confident in herself and wants to assert herself at the expense of her wife’s shortcomings. And then - this is bad form again.
- Fifth, don't go on a date if you're not in the mood. There are days when even crazy sex is not fun. The same thing happens when time is short. Baking a pie with one hand, drying your hair with the other and freaking out because you are late - no one needs such sacrifices. Both of you shouldn't waste your nerves on something like this.
What about the husband? Your image and alibi
How to behave with your husband? You must be above suspicion. Build yourself an impeccable reputation. Make sure that no one even thinks of suspecting you of treason. And first of all, the husband should be in absolute ignorance. Remember that a lot depends on your behavior at home, as well as in public.
The image of a decent wife and conscientious housewife will save you from unnecessary troubles. For example, the spouse will not have the thought of checking whether her friend really had it. And if so, which one?
But there should be an alibi just in case. At least indirectly. If you are supposedly planning a business trip, take home a pile of documents. Show your hard work in preparation by flipping through them over breakfast.
And if you are supposedly returning from the gym, do not forget to wash off your makeup. It would be nice to have a sports bag, a uniform and a tired look. Otherwise, don’t be surprised if your partner asks you what the coach looks like, whether he’s young or handsome.
Also remember - never discuss your love affairs with third parties. Even your best friend, who swore allegiance to you, cannot be trusted. You can trust if your goal is to show off. Or when both relationships end and there is nothing left to lose. But if you value a secret connection, then tell about your adventures only in your diary. Or go to a forum on these issues and vent your pain under a different name. This is the only way the secret will remain a secret. And yes, here it is also better to play it safe - not to describe names and details of events. Write what you feel, but in general. What if there is a catch here - will the spouse go to the forum or find the diary and read it?
And finally, a quote from the legendary Ranevskaya - “Everything passes.” Even love lasts to the grave. Lovers and unfaithful wives sooner or later separate, but the spouse remains. So, don’t build castles in the air, don’t cherish hopes for a future together with someone else, act wisely. Good luck!
Curator of the Open Library Nikolai Solodnikov. © Photo from Solodnikov’s personal archive
The “Dialogues” project (open discussions with famous Russians), which monthly brought together many St. Petersburg residents in the Mayakovsky library and was popular among the audience of Internet broadcasts, . The reason was pressure from the security services on the administration of the establishment. City officials also seem interested in killing the project. What caused this attitude and what will happen to “Dialogues”, the ideologist and founder of the project told Rosbalt Nikolay Solodnikov.
— Now the plot of the story is already well known. The FSB came to Mayakovsky’s library with searches, you had to resign, “Dialogues” after a three-year history were left without a platform. Tell us how this initiative, which caused so much noise, even came about?
— “Dialogues” were once just one of the formats of the “Open Library” project, but later it became the only one. Initially, in 2012, everything was conceived as a comprehensive, theoretical and, ideally, practical reorganization of the city library system. We held various festivals and collaborated with New Holland. They tried to force officials to look at how libraries should live in the city. But due to the immobility of the management system, including in the field of culture, no comprehensive reform was possible. All that remains is to act on your own. And we began to make such an ideal television in the library, a live broadcast, which we lost some time ago. This is how the “Dialogues” were born, within the framework of which it became possible to discuss a very wide range of issues - from sports to politics - with the participation of the best intellectuals of our country.
— The project attracted the attention of ill-wishers, including from the intelligence services, when you planned to invite Ukrainian politician Mustafa Nayem to St. Petersburg in May 2015. But a year before, you said that Dialogues had both economic and political problems. What did you mean then?
— Any movement from below always causes, let’s say, an unhealthy reaction from certain city officials.
The project lived absolutely independently, independently. We did not have any curators either in the presidential administration or in Smolny. We did not agree on anything with anyone anywhere. Therefore, of course, there was some dissatisfaction among officials initially. It was an endless number of ordeals, some conversations, some requests to stop what we were doing. And just in May 2015, the special services also became involved in this case.
— You have said more than once that the “Dialogues” were held at your personal expense; not a penny was allocated from the St. Petersburg budget for them. But in one of your interviews there is the following phrase: “Without financial and administrative support from the city authorities, it is difficult to do something.”
— At that moment, I was talking specifically about the entire Open Library project, about the conceptual reformation of the entire library system. Nothing can be done here without the participation of the city. And we made “Dialogues” completely independently. Without a doubt, if the project continues, we plan to maintain financial independence.
— You also once said that “Dialogues” for the Mayakovsky Library is a source of pride, and the administration of the institution does not want to abandon such a popular project...
“I said this at a time when the library had not yet received requests to confiscate documents or seize equipment from the FSB.
If you are ready for elderly women from the library administration to be interrogated day after day, then I am not ready.
If, in order to avoid this, it is necessary to quit and move “Dialogues” to another place, then that’s what needs to be done. But despite the fact that things have taken such a sharp turn, the project must continue in St. Petersburg. Without a doubt, now we will look for another site, primarily a state one.
— Can we say that at the “Dialogues” you were ready to discuss everything, regardless of the consequences? Or were there still taboo topics?
— We are free people, like everyone else who lives in Russia. No power can make a person unfree; freedom depends only on himself. Therefore, as soon as you yourself begin to set some boundaries within yourself, these are already problems exclusively for you, and not for the political authorities of the country. So we talked about everything. Otherwise, why do all this in principle?
— But still, you decided to concentrate on socio-political topics, and not conduct “Dialogues” exclusively in an educational way - about culture, art, history, and so on...
— Because any person is involved in politics in one way or another. Or politics concerns him.
A person simply cannot live outside the political field. Any attempts to get out of it are associated solely with self-restraint.
When venues do not allow themselves to do this or say that they are not interested, I assure you, this is most likely a matter of internal censorship of a particular organizer. Of course, there are specific events, for example, cooking courses. Although their policy is also relevant, because import substitution in the food sector is more a political issue than a culinary one. You need to perceive the world as a whole; you cannot separately consider each phenomenon that happens around you. The world is very different, very complex, everything is mixed with each other - economics with politics, politics with medicine, medicine with sports, sports with art. Therefore, the topics discussed in the “Open Library” are also very different. If you look at the list of “Dialogues”, of which there are already more than 100, the selection there is extremely wide. Which, I repeat, corresponds to the diversity of social life within the country.
— Did you have the feeling that as the project developed, government officials began to come to you as speakers less often because they were prohibited?
— No, there are not very many “talking” officials who can speak to the public. Those who were ready always came. Mikhail Piotrovsky - an official? Of course, an official. Or Alexey Kudrin. Although he is probably already a former official. But we always had the same task, and we never deviated from it - to invite speakers of different political views. But the fact that the management did not advise some people to come to us - that also happened, of course.
— Don’t you think that dialogue between people with diametrically opposed points of view can lead not to the consolidation of society, but to the escalation of the conflict?
“We never planned to quarrel people.” Dialogues initially imply a conversation, but not a dispute, quarrel, fight, and so on. So, of course, with the help of the project we wanted to achieve consolidation in society.
— Viktor Shenderovich said that the closure of “Dialogues” is natural. I quote: “Dialogue is not a genre of Putin’s Russia. This is a monologue country. Russia continues to rapidly degrade.” Do you agree with this statement?
— No, I believe that talking about the degradation of Russian society as a whole is completely incorrect and incorrect. The “Dialogues” were proof that the country continues to live. Without the participation of society and state institutions such as the Mayakovsky Library, this project could not exist. The fact that it is closed today is the result of the degradation of individual people and individual institutions of power. But not the authorities as a whole. Often our right hand does not know what our left hand is doing. Is Vladimir Putin interested in ensuring that there are no “Dialogues” in Russia? Of course not. He is interested in the opposite.
The task of destroying “Dialogues” at the very top is not worth it, I rule out this option. Another thing is that the mechanism of the Russian government is so complex and so contradictory, there are so many different centers of power that in our country the most living phenomena are often killed.
— But still, how did it happen that the project, from being educational in the eyes of the authorities, became almost extremist?
- I just answered this question. Now you want to make me out to be an oppositionist, but I am not an oppositionist. I am a person who taught for a long time, so my activities are related exclusively to enlightenment and education. It makes absolutely no sense to classify me as a member of any political camp. I'm not ready to take only one side.
Interviewed by Sofia Mokhova
While the interview was being prepared, it became known that Nikolai Solodnikov’s leadership of the National Library of Russia would provide a platform for the “Dialogues”.