(Originally Written October 22, 2009 in The Journal)
OK Ashley, you've heard my sob stories about loneliness and depression and this new unrequited love. You've heard of the destruction of my body, the breaking of my heart and the crushing of my soul. But now let's witness my glory - my mind. How about some philosophy.
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
Chapter 1 - Why existentialism
Existentialists insist on their essential optimism that man makes himself.
Existentialism in a sense is a reaction against the speculative idealism of Hegel.
Existentialism comes from Kierkegaard's phrase "existential dialectic".
In existentialism, existence is prior to essence. This means that the consciousness of one's own soul comes before anything else becomes clear.
Existentialism revolts against system building and focuses on more pressing human concerns.
The relation of cause to effect is measured by the efficacy of an act.
The relation of cause and effect is indistinguishable from means and end.
Sartre and Dewey (pragmatists) criticize philosophies of the past for stabilizing the norms that kept ruling parties in power.
Pragmatism and existentialism are similar in aim at first glance.
Sartre resets values from past to future. The past value is an emphasis on the bourgeois privilege whereas if values are set with the future in mind it leads to revolution.
Pragmatism fails though because fact cannot produce value. Science cannot distinguish between good and evil.
Value for Sartre lies between the way things are and the way things ought to be. The success of man (and failure) lies between the thing as it is and the thing as it should be.
The perception between the way things are and the way they should be is the fundamental insight of existential philosophy.
Values are created solely by the acts of man. What they take as good or bad, beautiful or ugly in their quest to give meaning to a meaningless world.
Positivistic ethics aims at being descriptive not normative.
As in Kantian ethics, existentialists claim there is no good or evil apart from will and there is no will without freedom.
Existentialism does not derive values from mere facts.
Some existentialists demand a return to faith in the Christian God as a necessary way out of our present moral chaos (Marcel & Kierkegaard).
Atheistic existentialists however claim that the return to the Christian God is removing the freedom of man and basing values once again on facts, though these facts are not sense-data but cosmic in origin.
Chapter 2: Soren Kierkegaard: The self against the system
The aim of Kierkegaard, his one problem was: to find out where the misunderstanding lies between speculation and Christianity.
Kierkegaard believed that the misunderstanding had its roots in the nature of personal existence.
Kierkegaard's work has a slight anti-scientific tone but it is really a revolt against Hegelian speculation.
Camus had a very strong anti-scientific tone.
Kierkegaard worries that by focusing on physiology and explaining the whole man in its scope will cause man to lose sight of the important field of ethics.
Kierkegaard argues that the system in never capable of explaining existence until it is complete and thus becoming timeless. Existence as it is happening is never complete and thus, the system is incapable of explaining existence.
Kierkegaard criticizes the systematizers by claiming that they build a palace to live next door in the barn.
The system builders acquire far flung knowledge and ignore the simple understanding of one's self, which is the only important understand.
The system, in its grandeur is deceiving. It uses wordy logical fallacies to appear logical.
Kierkegaard does not propound an orthodox form of Christianity. He denies any "objective truth of Christianity", instead stating the whole problem for every serious Christian is their own path to faith.
Kierkegaard focuses on the inwardness of the subjective journey of the one real entity (the individual) to the infinite being, known by faith.
Kierkegaard turns from the impersonal and trivial truths (though consistent) to the passionate truth realized only subjectively and meaningful. This truth is meaningful because it is contradictory.
By embracing total subjectivity, Kierkegaard renounced all abstraction and left only contradiction and paradox. Since abstraction is gone one cannot transfer through words one's experience to another. paradox is the only way and this is indirect communication.
Philosophy for Kierkegaard, like Kant is focused on the question, what is man? It deals with human problems, not the essence of cosmic reality.
Kierkegaard relies heavily on Plato, not Neo-Platonism, but the Dialogues themselves.
Kierkegaard states we live, or ought to live, in the awareness that here and now may be our last moment.
Existentialism focuses on the contingency of life.
Existentialism pays close attention to the meaninglessness that continually underlies the significance in human life.
Showing posts with label Pragmatism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pragmatism. Show all posts
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Dreadful Freedom - Marjorie Grene
(Originally written December 20, 2005 in Book 1)
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Dreadful Freedom
Marjorie Grene
1948
Chapter 1 - Why Existentialism?
Existentialism is (in some sense) a reaction against Hegel.
Existentialism's first principle is that existence is prior to essence.
Existentialism can come off as a more complex version of pragmatism. Both attempt to shift value from the past to the future. Dewey and Sartre have similar shifts of the definition of value. However, Sartre proposes a philosophy that supports a constant state of revolution, whereas Dewey would replace the old dogma with an emphasis on maintaining a progressive society (this is still dogmatic, just less precise).
Both systems state existence before essence, but pragmatism moves philosophy from speculation to practical outputs; whereas existentialism focuses in on a stream of consciousness. Pragmatism uses science; existentialism uses sense-data to promote scientific research.
"It is a different kind of existence whose priority to essence is proclaimed by the two philosophies" (Green, 9).
Pragmatism fails to recognize that pure facts and pure science cannot produce values. It can only add or detract from them.
Some existentialists believe that a return to faith in the Christian God is "a possible and even necessary way out of our present moral chaos" (Green, 13). The atheistic existentialist however contends that values must be founded on objective facts.
Both a return to God and a value system based on facts "seek to escape our ultimate, inexplicable and terrible responsibility for the values that we live by, by giving them a cosmic rather than a human... source" (Green, 13).
Chapter 2 - Soren Kierkegaard: the self against the system
Kierkegaard's problem was to find out what the misunderstanding was between speculation and Christianity. He contends that the problem is rooted in individual existence. (He uses the term 'speculation' as understood in Hegelian speculation).
He condemns empirical science: natural science is dangerous, especially physiology's attempt to take over ethics. He states that it is bad to treat ethics like a natural science, to make it an illusion of statistical averages.
He asks, "Do I need to know how the movement in the nervous system works in order to believe in God and love men?" (Green, 16).
Kierkegaard is afraid that by embracing natural science we will lose ourselves to it and forget that which is important, God.
Kierkegaard contends that the only important thing worth understanding is one's self.
Kierkegaard is limited by the Christian paradox: man's experience is nothingness before God, but it still fulfills his existence.
He contends there is no objective truth of Christianity.
He states that the problem for the sincere Christian is subjective. It is not to build a theological system, but to find the way to heaven for themselves. The Christian is only aware of his own personal existence and the existence of God.
Kierkegaard focuses philosophy into the question: "what is man?"
What is man?
-What can I know?
-What ought I do?
-What may I hope?
Kierkegaard attempted to fuse Plato & Christianity.
Kierkegaard and modern existentialism both held to the awareness that here and now may be the last moment as a central idea.
"Pragmatism is afraid to face evil" (Green, 27). It is also afraid of facing the ultimate puzzle of individual humanity.
Kierkegaard drowns himself in paradoxes and word plays. Some of his most profound passages are difficult to decide whether their profoundness lies in an amazingly brilliant insight or such incredibly word trickery.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)