Freedom is increased by enabling undominated choice, not merely by reducing domination

Evidence

The expansive way of increasing the extent of people’s freedom as non-domination can be nicely identified in terms of a distinction between factors that compromise liberty and factors that condition it. … Freedom as non-domination is compromised by domination and by domination alone. But while my freedom is not compromised, therefore, by a limitation in my ability to exercise it, that limitation is still significant; it conditions the freedom that I enjoy. We can increase the intensity and extent of people’s freedom as non-domination by reducing the compromises to which they are subject: that is, by reducing domination by others. But we may also increase the extent of people’s freedom as non-domination by reducing the influence of conditioning factors and by expanding the range or ease of the undominated choices that they enjoy. As we may say that someone is unfree so far as their freedom is compromised by domination, so we may say that they are not free in this or that respect—they are non-free, though not strictly unfree (Pettit 1989^)—insofar as their freedom is subject to certain conditioning factors. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism, 381

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Introduces the compromised-freedom vs conditioned-freedom distinction; ‘non-free but not strictly unfree’ is a precise theoretical split.
  • XREF: connects to: Freedom of choice can itself serve domination when options are controlled. — Herbert Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man: Studies in the…, 121; Freedom as non-domination prizes secure undominated choice over mere quantity of choice. — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 137; Freedom can be reconceived as non-domination rather than non-interference or self-mastery — Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and…, 1207 (+4 more)

Broader Connections