Real freedom is a term coined by the political philosopher and economist Philippe Van Parijs. It expands upon notions of negative freedom by incorporating not simply institutional or other constraints on a person's choices, but also the requirements of physical reality, resources and personal capacity. To have real freedom, according to Van Parijs, an individual must:
Under this conception, a moral agent could be negatively free to take a holiday in Miami, because no-one is forcing them not to (condition 1 is met); but not really free to do so, because they cannot afford the flight (condition 2 is not met). Similarly, someone could be negatively free to swim across the English Channel; but not really free, because they are not a good enough swimmer and would not be able to succeed in the task. Real freedom is, then, a matter of degree — one is more or less really free, not just either really free or not; and no-one has complete real freedom yet — no-one is currently really free to teleporttoMars, for instance.
Real freedom expands on negative freedom by adding the idea of actually being able to exercise a capacity or resource in the absence of constraint; but does not go as far as some ideas of positive freedom, by refraining from appeal to self-government by a real, best, or higher self.
The concept can be compared to Tawney's analysis on Equality of Opportunity in his 1931 Equality: "It has been interpreted rather as freedom from restraints than as the possession of powers. Thus conceived, it has at once the grandeur and the unreality of a majestic phantom."
Van Parijs uses the concept of real freedom as part of his influential argument for a universal basic income.[1]
Thelema asserts a similar belief that all have right to live, die, think, move, eat, drink, create, and love as they will, and "every person has the absolute and equal right to accomplish their Wills." “The Law is for all,” (Liber AL vel Legis I:34).[2]
