In the works of Plato and Kant we can find both similarities and differences in the way they interpreted the concepts of freedom and responsibility. This essay presents where they converge and also where they diverge in their understandings. Both Plato and Kant place the utmost importance on a person's ability to reason; both recognize that only through reasoning unhampered by biases and prejudices can true knowledge be achieved and enlightenment achieved. Kant argues that all people must be free to reason without depending on someone to guide them in life and make decisions for them. It also states that people should be totally free to publicly announce their opinions and feelings on any topic and issue, thus participating in changing laws and legislation. However, Kant states that people should obey the law of the state. If they believe a particular law is unjust, they should express their feelings regarding this law without interfering in the current state of affairs, and the law will be changed if such opinion is subjected to the test of time and is approved by a majority. For this reason, Kant introduces the notions of "private use of reason" and "public use of reason". By “private use of reason” he meant the use one makes in carrying out one's duty in a particular civil office, and by “public use of reason” that one makes as a “scholar before an audience of readers.” Kant writes that the private use of reason should be “strictly limited,” because otherwise it could provoke a revolution that will create chaos in the state. But “the public use of reason” must be totally free from constraints because only in this way will the Enlightenment follow. Plato, in turn, does not think that for a state to be good there must be absolute freedom of expression. He claims it will lead to