For decades, many philosophers have argued on the idea of human freedom. In the western world, the atheist religious has significantly impacted the process of this discourse. On the contrary, the eastern world which majorly consists of Madhyamika and Buddhism, who often do not agree with the monotheistic dominance labeled Existentialism. Sartre is among the many philosophers whose works expand on existential ideas about human freedom. Sartre states that ‘Man is condemned to be free’ which implies that existence precedes essence. He further argues that man is entirely responsible for not only what they are but also what they become in future. He states that we are our choices. Even if one does not choose, that still stands to be a choice as well. If we seek advice from others or borrow one’s ideas, you are still responsible for your very own desire of making such decisions. He, therefore, says, responsibility is everything that we do and our illusions or imaginations held in mind on what we could have become or done, is nothing but self-deception (Sartre et al., 2016).
Satre’s statement further implies that if one finds themselves in a situation which tends to limit them in some way, then the person should hold themselves entirely responsible since we all have the freedom to choose what we want. He explains further by stating that as human, we tend to exist first, and then determine our significance using choice and not the other way around. He expounds on this by giving an example of a carpenter who constructs a table with its purpose already in mind, thus, in this case, the essence of the table precedes its existence and the table has no freedom to choice what it wants to be or plan on what to be in future. Essentially, this statement no one is entirely subject to God’s plan or purpose for their life and, hence has the freedom to freely become what they want to be. In short, Freedom is vital and unique potentiality which constitutes us as people. Sartre rebuffs determinism, stating that it is our choices that influence us on how to respond and determine tendencies in life and not God, as many believe. Therefore, man’s essence always precedes his existence (Sartre et al., 2016).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Dostoyevsky, a renowned philosopher, states that ethics require God, and if there is no God, then there is no moral law to govern us. On its surface, this statement appears to be false. It basically implies that God is our only source of moral motivation, and if by any chance, he was not in existence, then no human would really care about being ethical. I tend to disagree with Dostoyevsky statement because as human beings, we have a moral obligation to do what is right regardless of God’s existence. Both Utilitarianism and Kant’s ethics emphasizes that people got to be ethical because we ought to be rational. They also argue that since people desires to be happy, then they ought to be rational in their actions and choice they take (Miguens et al., 2016.).
Furthermore, in most cases, we are often governed by laws which are put in place by man and not God himself. Therefore, regardless of whether God exists or not, we still find ourselves having a moral obligation to our legal systems put in place. Moreover, divine judgment is not the only motivation that drives one to be ethical. People often hold so many reasons to be moral rather than just the dread of God’s punishment or approval. For example, many people tend to strive to be ethical out of a desire to be accepted, a longing to please a romantic interest or a desire to avoid prison and so much more. Therefore, Dostoyevsky claims seem to be completely false, not only me but at least to a significant number of people.
References
Miguens, S., Preyer, G., & Morando, C. B. (2016). Pre-reflective consciousness: Sartre and contemporary philosophy of mind . London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Sartre, J.-P., Kirchmayr, R., Jameson, F., Broder, D., & Selous, T. (2016). What is subjectivity? London: Verso.
