negative freedom

is 'the absence of restraints of various kinds on one's ability to act' (defined against positive freedom which is 'the capacity for self-mastery and self-government').

Negative freedom refers to the absence of external obstacles to self-guided choice and action, whether imposed by the state, corporations, or private individuals. Positive freedom, on the other hand, is understood as the capacity to realize an autonomous will, one generally fashioned in accord with the dictates of 'universal reason' or 'self-interest,' and hence unencumbered by the weight of custom, transcendental will, and tradition. In short, positive freedom may be best described as the capacity for self-mastery and self-government, and negative freedom as the absence of restraints of various kinds on one's ability to act as one wants' (Mahmood 2005:10-11).

negative 'freedom from' 'some portion of human existence must remain independent of social control' . . . . . . 'Positive. . . 'freedom for' . . . the freedom of the individual to be his own master. . . 'or to participate in the social control to which he is subject' (leo Strauss 'relativism' 135)

is the absence of restraints of various kinds on one's ability to act as one wants.

in short, positive freedom may best be described as the capacity for self-mastery and self-government, and negative freedom as the absence of restraints of various kinds on one's ability to act as one wants . . . I want to emphasize the concept of individual autonomy that is central to both, and the concomitant elements of coercion and consent that are critical to this topography of freedom. In order for an individual to be free, her actions must be the consequence of her 'own will' rather than of custom, tradition, or social coercion.' (Mahmood 2005: 7).

negative freedom, n.All

negative freedom