translation being exposed to the two traditions i am unable to decide which one covers best the definition how we define freedom itself depends upon various factors culture education environment and individuals own understanding on where the voluntary freedom ends and the legal begins however let us see how the french definition reads into english i admit this falls beyond my area of specialisation and could possibly be literal in places freedom is the sense of acting according to one's own will without being restrained by the power of anyone else it is defined negatively as the absence from submission servitude constraint exercised by someone else positively as the autonomy and spontaniety of a rational being the voluntary human behaviours are based on freedom and qualified as free this notion is seen as an abstract and normative value of the human actions and at the same time like a solid reality these two perspectives are interwoven in many ways and could lead to errors of categorisation there are therefore numerous confusions that can arise with respect to the term freedom so it is necessary to distinguish the different sense of this word the freedom could be taken as an attribute of the human being of his will and be the condition of natural and positive rights but also his duties the effective realisation of the voluntary acts has a dimension that could not be possible without the later these two ideas of human existence are not necessarily compatible for example the existence of legal freedoms can be felt while its reality existence in our acts and its essence its conception that we have poses problems the first point could be addressed in a socio political research the second point constitutes its metaphysical base and particularly the philosophical understanding of freedom this article is divided into two parts to facilitate this understanding the first part covers the philosophical aspects treating the metaphysical notions of freedom and the second part the sociological aspects however one should keep in mind that the two aspects are interrelated the freedom is the sense of acting according to one's own will without being restrained by the power of anyone else it is defined negatively as the absence from submission servitude constraint exercised by someone else positively as the autonomy and spontaniety of a rational being the voluntary human behaviours are based on freedom and qualified as free this notion is seen as an abstract and normative value of the human actions and at the same time like a solid reality these two perspectives are interwoven in many ways and could lead to errors of categorisation there are therefore numerous confusions that can arise with respect to the term freedom so it is necessary to distinguish the different sense of this word the freedom could be taken as an attribute of the human being of his will and be the condition of natural and positive rights but also his duties the effective realisation of the voluntary acts has a dimension that could not be possible without the later these two ideas of human existence are not necessarily compatible for example the existence of legal freedoms can be felt while its reality existence in our acts and its essence its conception that we have poses problems the first point could be addressed in a socio political research the second point constitutes its metaphysical base and particularly the philosophical understanding of freedom this article is divided into two parts to facilitate this understanding the first part covers the philosophical aspects treating the metaphysical notions of freedom and the second part the sociological aspects however one should keep in mind that the two aspects are interrelated