He argues that if we do something for a reason, that is how we are, so we must be responsible. But if we are responsible for our actions, we must also be responsible for ourselves. Hence, Strawson explains that to be responsible for ourselves, we would have to have chosen to be the way we are, which we are unable to do. He ends this interpretation of the argument by stating, "[s]o
He then guards the thought of a will that reliably reacts to former motivational reasons: our activities have a consistent union with our intentions, tempers, and circumstances (Bricke, 1988). These intentions produce activities that have the same causal necessity saw in reason impact relations that we see in outer articles. Hume rejects the idea of liberty totally. While he gives no meaning of liberty in that work, he contends that the idea is incompatible with necessity, and, best case scenario and liberty. All human activities are brought about by particular former intentions, yet liberty and necessity are reconcilable when we characterize liberty as an issue of acting or not acting, as per the determinations of the will.
This theory opposes the belief in the objectivity of moral truth. Moreover, there is no universal truth in ethics, only various cultural codes instead. On the other point of view, it has been suggested that the world should derive an objective truth in every action. This essay will argue against the existence of objective truth in
One can refer to Husserl’s phenomenological method toward intersubjectivity. For Husserl, the starting point had to be ‘consciousness’, since, without it, his goal to establish secure philosophical and scientific knowledge would have not been possible. Husserl presented phenomenology with a transcendental turn. One can seriously take Kantian idiom of “transcendental idealism”. He believed that the raw matter of knowledge must be, existing independently of human minds and would remain unknown forever.
Life is not a journey for happiness. Our life is all about finding meaning. The greatest duty for all persons is to find meaning in his or her life. Essence means the individual real nature of a thing especially as contrasting to its existence. Existence means reality as presented in experience.
As Butler affirms “ The epistemological capacity to apprehend a life is partially dependent on that life being produced according to norms that qualify it as a life or , indeed, as a part of life. In this way, the normative production of ontology thus produces the epistemological problem of apprehending a life, and this in turn gives rise to the ethical problem of what is to acknowledge” (Butler, 2009:3). Butler sees the framing as an epistemological problem that is related to power structures. “The frames through which we apprehend or, indeed, fail to apprehend the lives of others as lost or injured (lose-able or injurable) are politically saturated. They are themselves operations of power” (Butler 2009:1).
If any single thesis could be said to constitute the doctrine of existentialism, it would be that the possibility of choice is the central fact of human nature. Even the thesis that existence precedes essence often means no more than that people do not have fixed natures that limit or determine their choices, but rather it is their choices that bring whatever nature they have into being (Borchert, et al.,
In order to present a reality, one needs to presents through the concept of monism, dualism, physicalism and idealism. Monism is the independent existent of a single reality. It can be either mental or physical by nature. The fundamental existent of mental by nature is idealism, which is opposed to dualism, of mind and matter in reality. On the other hand, physicalism is the independent reduction to materiality.
It means there is no definite imperative or guidance on which all the people could rely on. Any honest reflection would reveal that the universe is a bottomless void of unknown, and the experience of nothingness is unavoidable part of human existence. Therefore, the only purpose or meaning to undertake is the one individual chooses for themselves, and the only value to their life is the one they give. In a nutshell, the key principles of Existentialism are as follows: • the fundamental principle is that “existence precedes essence”, i. e., people are what they do, their existence comes first, and only then they define themselves through their choices and actions that follow them; • the categories of absurdity of life, fear, despair, loneliness, suffering, and death are put forward; • the person has to oppose the society, the state, the hostile environment, because they all impose their will, morality, and ideals upon the individual; • the notion of alienation and absurdity are interconnected; • the freedom of the individual has the highest vital value; • the existence of man is interpreted as a drama of
Authenticity and inauthenticity have always been the central concerns of existentialism. In this essay, Sartre’s notion of authenticity and inauthenticity will be analyzed. A brief comparison between Heidegger’s and Sartre’s notion of authenticity will be covered as well. Next, this essay will also attempt to explain how inauthenticity is a central concern for Sartre as it is viewed as a method for humankind to evade responsibility and ignoring the freedom they have. Lastly, this essay will discuss why Sartre’s view account of inauthenticity leads to an important implications on the society.