"The Paradox of Autonomy: Axel Honneth on the Pathologies of Individual Freedom" ISMAEL P. MAGADAN, JR.

Rogationist Seminary College / University of San Carlos Cebu City Abstract: For what does it really mean to be free? The implementation of the RA, translated as "Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012", received heavy criticism from both "real" citizentry and virtual "netizenry". The common objection points in the direction which leads to addressing a violation, intentionally crafted or not, by the Senate and the Administration, in suppressing freedom, in general and freedom of speech, in particular. This issue pertains to a section of the Act that penalizes anybody who utters libelous statements on the cyberspace. Due to the lack of definition, however, libel here maybe extended to whatever degrading, discriminating and scandalous accusation to any person or corporate. Seen as the demise of freedom of speech, especially of criticism, the Act is criticized from many directions. This work neither seeks to arrive at a value judgment as to whether freedom of speech is really violated by RA or not, nor does this work intend to arrive at a definite conception of freedom; rather, it will deal with the dominant notion of freedom which, due to the force of its content, majority (if not everybody) succumb to. Thus, the notion says: freedom is an individual's capacity to decide for her own and determine her own life according to the standards that she herself created. Beyond doubt, this is the most practical and most convincing notion of freedom. In this case, freedom is autonomy - the capacity to stand alone. But according to Axel Honneth, autonomy is not without flaw. Too much emphasis on it will most likely tend to result to pathological situations than to healthy ones. It is true that freedom as autonomy has good sides but Honneth cautions that eventually, autonomy will encounter a paradoxical reversal: an individual who always stresses his autonomy is on the danger of "indeterminacy" and "loneliness." For Honneth, therefore, freedom must be social in its nature, i.e., communicative and shared. Here, I discuss in brief Honneth's notion of freedom as intersubjectivity in his theory of recognition. Key Words: Axel HonnethAutonomyPathologiesRecognitionIndeterminacy Loneliness