In this passage from Hegel he says that freedom is woefully misunderstood in its formal subjective sense and has been far removed from its essential purpose and objectives. People think that they should be able to do what they want and that is what freedom is, and that anything that limits their desires, their impulses and their passions is a limit on their freedom. Hegel says that this is not true, but that these limitations are simply the condition from which they must free themselves, and that society and government are the place where freedom is actualized. What I think he means by this is that without limits we wouldn't know what freedom is. If you could always do what you always wanted, the idea of ​​not being able to do something would be so foreign to you that you would not understand what it means to have no freedom, nor would you understand what is to have freedom. either. This is why it is impossible to have one hundred percent freedom, because if we ever achieved one hundred percent freedom, you would be trampling on other people's freedoms, because not everyone wants the same thing. This is what I believe Hegel is trying to say, is that freedom is simply the process of progressing freedoms, not a tangible goal, because as free as you may think you are, you still have laws and limits and that's OK, it should be seen as a tangible goal. reminder of the freedom we have. Hegel says that the opposite nature of spirit is matter. And the essence of matter is gravity and the essence of spirit is freedom. Matter is contained outside itself, but spirit has an autonomous existence. This autonomous knowledge and existence is the essence of self-awareness, therefore consciousness itself. The first conscious...... middle of paper ......ing ethics and for any deterioration of these ethics. This responsibility often seems neglected in history, but Hegel warns against pessimistic preachers with lofty, ill-defined, and impossible-to-maintain ideals. Often, he says, people complain that history has been immoral without choosing moral ideals that are truly universal, rather than merely subjective. Overall, I mostly agree with Hegel's arguments. I agree that freedom is misunderstood and true freedom can never be achieved, it is simply a matter of gaining freedom one limitation at a time. And right now I think I'm as free as I can be, but a thousand years from now people might look back and say I had no freedom. Freedom is therefore a very subjective thing and is in reality an invention of man. But with a society and governments that most consider necessary for men, you have to limit certain freedoms..