Study Questions #34
Berlin – Two Concepts of Liberty
1)What question is the “negative sense” of liberty meant to address?
2)What question is the “positive sense” of liberty meant to address?
3)Under what condition does Berlin say that we lack political liberty?
4)Does Berlin think it makes sense to talk about poverty as a constraint on one’s negative freedom? Why or why not?
5)What is Berlin’s point regarding the relationship between freedom and justice or fairness?
6)What does Berlin think of Mill’s argument that negative liberty is necessary condition for the growth of human genius?
7)What, according to Berlin, is the relationship between negative liberty and self-government?
8)In what way does the positive sense of liberty lend itself to thinking of human persons as “divided” into two selves?
9)And how does this view lead to the possibility of bullying and oppression, according to Berlin?
10)This isn’t a question, but think about Berlin’s claim that “conceptions of freedom directly derive from views of what constitutes a self.”
11)What does Berlin mean by the “retreat to the inner citadel”?
12)What implications does Berlin think an analysis of this idea have for the definition of negative liberty as “the ability to do what one wishes”?
13)What does Berlin say is the “metaphysical heart of rationalism”?
14)What does Berlin think of the idea that “if moral and political problems were genuine…they must in principle be soluble; that is to say, there must exist one and only one true solution to any problem”?
15)What is the relationship between this view and authoritarianism?
16)What does Berlin identify as the premises of the argument he has surveyed in section V?
17)What belief does the ancient faith of a ‘final solution’ rest upon, according to Berlin? Is this belief true, according to Berlin? Why or why not?
18) What is the relationship between the pluralism and conflict of value, and liberty, according to Berlin?
To Think About:
Clearly Berlin is a supporter of the ideal of negative liberty. But what is Berlin’s ultimate position on positive liberty? Does he reject it outright? Or is his position more nuanced?
Berlin’s discussion of the relationship between pluralism and liberty has sparked much discussion among philosophers recently. Is he correct to think that pluralism supports the importance of negative liberty? Or that a monism of values undermines it?
© Routledge 2014