What is Liberty?

[Final-Fan]

palou said:

Final-Fan said:
Of the three, #2 seems best offhand. #1 seems like a sort of primal definition, of which #2 is perhaps a refinement to fit it into a society. #3 seems incomplete (as if it, in trying to be specific, thereby went a bit off target)

3) Is certainly not incomplete - it really does answer the most questions with the most precision. The question is more if you like the answer or not (I don't - I find it very artificial, with the stated issues.)

My problem with 2 would be, for example;

Say, there's a hurricane incoming, in a poor nation. A smart businessman quickly buys all the essential supplies in the area, and then proceeds to sell them at a ludicrous price, which locals are forced to pay (if they can even afford it.)

1) would probably tell you that this goes against the principle of liberty, since you are preventing a lot of people from getting something that they strongly want;

3) would tell you that it's a perfectly valid transaction of wealth;

2) would tell you... well, I don't know, really?

The problem is, to me, it really doesn't seem to *solve* any problems. It simply calls them by a different name. Just shift the problem from "is this right?" to "is this infringing upon other's liberties?" 

To answer anything clearly, it seems to me that this forces you to either establish an infinite number of arbitrary discriminants (so, no progress whatsoever from just declaring everything right or wrong on a whim) or reducing your concept of "border of liberty" to either 1 or 3.

For an example of what I meant by incomplete, suppose that in a tragic misunderstanding Donald Trump built a 50 foot wall around the house of John Mexico.  Has he infringed upon John's freedom?