Wednesday, November 27, 2013

The Great Jean-Paul Sartre!

As I read through the example essays, provided to us by Thad, I could not help but notice that each and every one of them utilized something that Jean-Paul Sartre had said. I was unable to read the material prior to class on Monday, so I learned as I went along, and read during class. But while I was in class I began to understand why all of those sample essays reflected Sartre’s works. First reason being for the fact that it was probably the last thing in class that the students covered. But, I believe the real reason is because he literally defines existentialism. It says in the preview “It is Sartre who is mainly responsible for both the formulation and the popularization of existentialism.” But what has me confused about that is that I thought Kierkegaard was the Father of Existentialism. Anyways! I find that the way Sartre explains things it is much straighter forward, and seems much more spot on.

“Man simply is. Not that he is simply what he conceives himself to be, but he is what he wills, and as he conceives himself after already existing---as he wills to be after that leap towards existence.  Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself.”

Sartre makes this clear that this is the first principle of existentialism. It makes perfect sense! We exist because we will ourselves to live. If we chose not to live then we would take the easy road out and just kill ourselves. (That’s what I feel people with no will or drive to live would do—suicide). We cannot be something were not, for we are just what we are and nothing more. (((Oooooooo I feel like a philosopher)))  We are all unique and we have different things that motivate us to live each day and we all have different aspirations for what we plan to achieve down the road.

This is where responsibility comes into play. What I found interesting with this is what Sartre said about for all of mankind.

“What we choose is always for the better; and nothing can be better for us unless it is for the better for all.”

This is something I really didn’t agree with, as I side with Dostoevsky here. I feel that there will come a time where people, regardless of how harmful it could be to themselves or to others, will pursue their most advantageous advantage no matter what. This is because they have the choice to do so. Our own free unfettered choice to do whatever it is that we desire. I do not feel that a person will always choose something that will always benefit mankind.

But to Sartre this is what gives us responsibility for our actions. That we are to do what is best for us because we represent it for all.

His example:

“If I am a worker, for instance, I may choose to join a Christian rather than a Communist trade union. And if, by that membership, I choose to signify that resignation is, after all, the attitude that best becomes man , that man’s kingdom is not upon earth, I do not commit myself alone to that view. Resignation is my will for everyone, and my action is, in consequence, a commitment on behalf of all mankind. Or is, to take a more personal case, I decided to marry and to have children, even though this decision proceeds simply from my situation, from my passion or my desire, I am thereby committing not only myself, but humanity as a whole, to the practice of monogamy. Lam thus responsible for myself and for all men, and I am creating a certain image of man as I would have him to be. In fashioning myself I fashion man.”

I think that if Sartre were to come back to this world now and see just how things are I think that this would change. My counter example would be that I could be a Christian and join a communist trade union and still hold my faith, and I would advocate my stance should the opportunity arise. I would not care if mankind was against this. I know lots of father who have small families and are not there for them although they know it is wrong of them to do so and that they should be holding that responsibility. But it doesn't happen.

I do believe that we are all responsible for the actions that we carry out in our lives, and we are the ones who have to live with the effects of those actions. They may not be for the benefit of mankind but they are something that each individual will have to live with. 

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Death

For me I thought Heidegger was the toughest piece to read thus far. In class I learned the this was just a part of the way that Heidegger spoke. Of course there is always that translation flaw that comes when you turn German to English, but this piece was still different. Heidegger created his own little language, or twist on language, in order to avoid clear distinction. He refused to make distinction. What I also found interesting is that he really didn’t care about the external world. This is because he wanted a total view. It was interesting to me that he say the Nazi movement as something to be admired, although he did not support genocide, it was the way that the Nazis expressed their view of a perfect world. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that is the take I got from his background information.

Now its deep though time!

When we die… Is it peaceful? Will it hurt? Will there be another life on the other side? Will we end up in a heavenly paradise and look over the world in which we came? No one really knows, nor will we ever know.

For Heidegger, being in the world comes to an end in death, as reference to Da-sein.  Da-sein is life, the actual state of being in life. For the authentic Da-sein this is denied, because death is not something a Da-sein can experience.

“Death does not reveal itself as a loss, but as a loss experienced by those remaining behind.” (pg. 140)

Heidegger even goes further to saying just how death can be formulated. And it is in these three things:
  1. 1.       As long as Da-sein is, not-yet belongs to it, which it will be--- what is constantly outstanding.
  2. 2.       The coming-to-its-end of what is not-yet-at-an-end (in which what is outstanding is liquidated with regard to its being) has the character of no-longer-being-there.
  3. 3.       Coming-to-an-end implies a mode of being in which the actual Da-sein absolutely cannot be represented by someone else. (pg. 141).


For death is something familiar to us. In this world it occurs at every given moment. People die and others are born and that’s just the way things are.

The first group asked us to write down a question and reflect towards it. (if I can remember it properly)

“How would you feel if death were to come at this very moment?”

My response was along these lines:

If death were to come at this very moment I would welcome it with open arms, not for the fact that I no longer want to be a part of this world, but for the fact that if it was really going to happen, it is clearly inevitable. I cannot escape death, as there will be a day where I will have to face it and either accept it or not accept it. The point is, regardless if you accept it or not, your going to die if it is really is happening. Although there are a million things that I would still like to do in my life, and that I am still young, I have no grudge against death itself. For death is something meaningful. Because if you think about it, we only have meaning in life because of the short time that we have in this physical being. If we were to live for eternity, I would lose purpose in life I think. So why resist something that we all know if going to happen, just accept it and in that moment appreciate the life that you had before.

Now! When the second group asked their big question, I was not quite ready for that one…

For Heidegger the most fundamental of all questions is “Why are there essents, why is there anything at all, rather than nothing?”

But “What is my biggest question?”

It is: “Will I ever have to courage to be the person that I truly want to be?”

After the day is set and done and after I have thought over my day and everything going on in my life, it is this question that presents itself to me more often than I care to give it credit for.

There is this ideal person that I truly want to be, but for some reason, I just cannot come to terms with it. It is as if I am too scared to take that leap forward and become the person that I should and want to be. I am almost certain that this question will continue to haunt me for quite sometimes, and maybe, just maybe, I will get the benefit of having it answered one day. 

Wednesday, November 6, 2013

What If?

As I laid in bed Monday night, I found myself reconsidering about how I live my life.

For hours before, I learned the truth behind why one of the classmates, in which I look up to in this class, hasn't been around for two weeks. It occurred to me that I could have never seen this person again. For not knowing them, and for having no real emotional connection, it is absurd to me to think that this person could have been wiped out of my life forever. What’s worse is I would have never been able to say goodbye or thank you for all that they have done for me although they did not intend to. In that moment, I found myself being grateful, and I was struck with awe and wonder. For at that moment, I did not know what to think, what to feel, I was completely lost in the moment. I wanted to cry, but it was restrained by gratitude and happiness. For I am someone who truly believes, that every person in your life is of value to you in one way or another.

Reflecting on this, I got to thinking:

What if I would die tomorrow?

What would people remember me by?

How long will they miss me for?

Will I have made a difference in the world?

As Miguel de Unamuno said: “Act so that in your own judgment and in the judgment of others you may deserve eternity, act so that you may be irreplaceable, act so that you do not deserve death.”

WOW!!

“Act as if you were to die tomorrow, but only in order to survive and become eternal.” (pg. 159).

WOOOOOOWWWWWW!

I got to thinking about my family… What it would mean to them if I was gone?

My friends… would they cry and remorse? What would they remember me by?

My pets… What would happen to them?

My legacy… what would it look like?

I am just a typical person who works as a security guard to make it through college. I am aiming for a career that I am uncertain that they will need me in any time soon. I have an internship that I am not completely fond of, but I have to do. I work hard in school, and stress each day to get through it (I am so tired of school). I go to the gym, run, play with my dogs, and care for my birds. I play xbox whenever I get a free chance. My life is in no way perfect, and is filled with struggle, but it is life all the same.

It hit me!

If I were to die tomorrow, everything that I see as a complete struggle and miserable in fact is not as bad as It could be. I could not have my life. I can do what I want with my life, “act so that I deserve eternity.” If I were to die tomorrow, I would be disappointed with myself right now, as I would have not accomplished or left the impact that I wanted to by this point.

Monday night was a life changing moment for me.


It was extremely ironic once again about the topics that we covered in class. It almost seems as if this class is running in a parallel dimension in my life right now, like it’s a stalker in the shadows. Dostoevsky hit the nail on the head last week, and this week Unamuno did it for me. I am glad to see that I am not only one who found Kierkegaard’s philosophy philosophically heroic. I now have three favorite philosophers: Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, and Unamuno.