He is certainly free to attempt to devise a method by which to reach beyond the islands boundaries. The practical failure of any such attempt would be not be viewed by him as an interferance with his freedom.

However, if this same man were struck by another man, or if he were restrained or imprisoned by an act of force exerted against him by another human being, then he might reasonably conclude that his freedom had indeed been interfered with.

Thus, we see that "freedom" relates to a condition of human non-intervention, when such intervention is possible. It does not relate to a state of natural "freedom", where the possibility of human intervention does not exist.

There is a further corollary to be drawn from this observation. That is, the loss of freedom does not occur via an accidental, random "act of nature". Nor does it necessarily occur through the accidental or inadvertent incursions men or women may make against each other.

For example, you are jostled in a crowd. Someone takes a parking place you had hoped to get for yourself. You lose out at an auction because someone bids a higher price. You enter into a voluntary agreement that proves to be less advantageous than you had anticipated.