Sarte is by far my favorite book that we have read yet in this class. Many of his views are consistent with my own ideas on humanity and how people should live their lives. I found Sarte to be extremely interesting and fairly easy to understand, but I found some of his ideas conflict and oppose each other. One of the goals of Existentialism is a Humanism was to address the comments that critics have made about existentialism beginning a pessimistic philosophy. Although several of the ideas of existentialism that Sarte discusses are not exactly what I would call optimistic. I think it is extremely pessimistic to say that man can never count on another man and that we can't trust others on just the goodness of humanity. What about those who devote their lives to protecting others? Those people who are doctors, police officers, soldiers etc. Can we not depend on these people who in many cases have sacrificed their lives to save others? These are people we don't at all and who don't personally owe us anything. In the world of Sarte, if there is no goodness of God to depend on, then who can we trust in life? Who is there to save us from ourselves?
Then there are parts where he does show how existentialism can be very optimistic. Sarte believes that man are responsible for their own destinies, and that their life is solely determined by them and their actions. Basically, to Sarte, life is what you make it. People shouldn't go on living their lives the way others have defined it or defined them. We can all define our own lives and who we are as people. This means that man have the capacity to, by their own actions, to make something of themselves. We make our own circumstances. It is very optimistic to believe that all humans can create and invent great things for themselves and for others. Personally, this is the part of exisentialism that I agree with the most, because it grants a lot of responsibility to the individual. People shouldn't be able to blame their misfortunes on others. But at the same time, it is sometime this full responsiblity can be scary and too much for people to handle. It would be nice and comforting if there was some goodness in the world that was directing our actions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm not sure exactly where you come down on Sartre's idea of radical freedom, but seems very pessimistic to me. Living in a world where you have this radical freedom is a scary place. If you don't have any guidelines about how to act, how are you supposed to?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ben. I think radical freedom is more of a pessimistic idea than optimistic. Yes, we have a responsibility for this freedom, but that means that EVERY small thing that we do is something we must be held accountable for. Everything we do (or by choice do NOT do) is something we have to be responsible for. To me that's slightly terrifying.
ReplyDeleteOkay just to be the devils advocate over here, who says if something is scary it means its pessimistic? Lots of things can be scary but still great. I do actually agree its pretty scary to think every single thing I do I must be held accountable for. But I don't think that makes it pessimistic or optimistic. I actually think Sartes pretty realistic. By being held accountable for our actions, we have no one to blame but ourselves. If everyone thought like this, maybe people would put more thought into their actions, and or become more motivated to make a change in their lives.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I was probably incorrect in using pessimitic to describe what I thought about Sarte's ideas on how people can't rely on others and there is no human nature we can depend. I would agree with Mary that Sarte is realistic. He is being realistic in saying that we aren't able to depend solely on and trust others we don't know. He is also being realistic when he describes how we are responsible for our own fate and our lives. I find this scary and also depressing. It is depressing that we are solely responsible for own lives which means we are also solely responsbile for our failures and inaction in life as well.
ReplyDeleteI could see how it could be considered scary to be accountable for all of our actions and thus our "fate" (in the way Harwood used Oedipus as an example). But I do not see how that could be "pessimistic". It seems optimistic in a sense because individual's are given radical freedom. To me, this is what makes the "american dream" and "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" possible. With this radical freedom we can further ourselves in society and work. Like Mary said, we can blame no one else for our place in society then ourselves. We have control over our own life.
ReplyDeleteWhile the idea of radical freedom/responsibility may not be pessimistic, I agree with Jessie that having such freedom/responsibility is a very scary thought. To respond to Elise, while this system may make the American dream possible, it also seems to make anyone who hasn't achieved the American dream directly responsible for not achieving it. I would argue that there are many other factors other than an individual's character that play into one's station in life.
ReplyDelete