Isaiah Berlin distinguished between two concepts of freedom: positive freedom and negative freedom. Negative freedom is freedom from external restraints and interference from others, exemplified by classical liberalism. Positive freedom sees freedom as having the ability and means to fulfill one's potential and aims, as advocated by modern liberals who saw social disadvantages as limiting freedom. These two views of freedom have different implications for the role of the state and individual responsibility.

1. Positive and negative freedom

2. Isaiah Berlin
 In his influential analysis of freedom he distinguished
between 2 rival concepts – positive freedom and
negative freedom
 This is often portrayed as the distinction between
being ‘free to do something’ and being ‘free from
something’

3. Negative freedom
 Classical liberals believed in negative freedom ie. non
interference – the absence of external constraints upon
the individual
 This conception of freedom is negative in that it leaves
the individual ‘at liberty’ to act as he/she wishes,
whatever the consequences
 Hobbes defined freedom as the ‘silence of the laws’

4. Negative freedom
 Poverty, disadvantage and disease may be regarded as
misfortunes, but from this viewpoint they cannot be
said to limit freedom
 Ideological implications – those who employ freedom
in this negative sense are therefore inclined to support
the minimal state and sympathise with laissez faire
capitalism

5. Negative freedom
 This classical liberal tradition of freedom reflected in
the ideas of the New Right/Thatcherism
 From this approach freedom is expanded by rolling
back the state, encouraging individuals to take greater
responsibility for their own lives and circumstances
 Freedom of choice in the market place

6. Evaluation
 Promotes a ‘survival of the fittest system’ which may
undermine equality of opportunity and social justice
 Council house sales, tax cuts and reduction of state
benefits will broaden the realm of liberty
 Critics – this conception of freedom may simply
legitimise greed and grant the weak nothing more
than the ‘freedom to starve’

7. Positive freedom
 Flaws of negative freedom led modern liberals to
redefine freedom, in order to remain true to core
liberal principles and values
 Concerned with the opportunities available to
individuals to realise their true potential
 Freedom ultimately means being free from the social
evils that can blight human existence as identified in
the Beveridge Report – want, disease............................

8. Positive freedom
 It recognises social disadvantage (not just law and
physical restraint) as an enemy of freedom
 Positive freedom suggest that liberty can be expanded
by welfarism and economic intervention
 Comes close to identifying freedom with equality of
opportunity

9. Evaluation
 Critics – classical liberals and New Right – this
principle is linked to the growth of the ‘nanny state’- it
allows our interests to be defined for us and so robs us
of responsibility for our own lives
 Positive freedom links closely to socialists and Marx –
self fulfilment, human potential