Only governments can ensure, through laws and policies, the provision of universal public goods, such as a safe supply of water, affordable health care and housing. They can regulate commerce and the private sector. However, governments cannot legislate Jean-Paul Sartre's radical freedoms, Amartya Sen's developmental freedoms, or Hannah Arendt's recognition and respect for difference. This article presents the philosophical definitions and analyses of freedoms by Sartre, Sen, and Arendt. Sartre, Sen and Arendt are of interest to sociologists because their analyses are rooted in societal forms, practices and processes. Sartre and Sen offer sociologists an epistemological foundation for evaluating political and economic freedoms, and Arendt offers a foundation for understanding complex social relations. Sartre poses the biggest challenge to the deep and complex American ethos of freedom because he radically decenters self-interest. That is, "I must fight for others' freedoms, and they will fight for mine." It is a win-win dialectic, not one that gives rise to inequalities and continually reinforces inequalities. (Contains 1 note.)