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.