- - The slave morality is the one that Nietzsche thinks that produced a "slavish" sort of person who now needs this morality to justify and dress up character traits that would otherwise just seem like weakness.
- This life is made to seem better because it is some sort of "eternal reward' up in heaven, but if that is not the case then it might seem as if this sort of life is unbearable.
This argument is not sound
Q 21: How do Sartre's views relate to Nietzche's writings on the theme of "God is dead"? Do you find Sartre's resulting views persuasive?
Nietzche:
- Doesn't believe God existed but we as humans fabricated him and by our lost of faith we killed his essence.
Sartre:
- Believe in Existentialist Humanism. Meaning the world we live in is human, everything that was created was created by humans, not by a greater power. We created our values ourselves. Meaning because we have no more faith, God no longer exists.
Our opinion:
We do not think that Sartre is making a persuasive argument because we do not think that humans could exist on their own. There had to be something greater than us to create humans. Meaning that we are lesser than the creator thus our values and morals can not be taken seriously. Even if you believe in evolution there had to be a first mover to start the chain of evolutionary development. The mover would be the power that created the first elements and condition that allowed for a single celled organism to develop.
QUESTION 22: What does Sartre mean when he says that, in our case, “existence precedes essence”, and what do the consequences he draw from this fact (forlorness, aguish, despair) entail for how we should think about our lives? Explain why you do, or don’t, find his views plausible.
EXISTENCE PRECEDES ESSENCE:
- When Sartres says that existence precedes essence, there was no set plan for humans
- When we’re born, our lives weren’t planned out prior to our existence
- We are nothing at the beginning, after we are at the point of existence, we choose the meaning of our own lives and how we want to live it
ANGUISH:
- All men are responsible for themselves, where they affirm what actions are able to be taken by others
- The way a man chooses to act implies what actions others can take
- When we realize we have this responsibility we feel anguish
- Men is nothing else but what he makes himself
- This impacts our lives because we are choosing for all of mankind, we are the lawmaker
FORLORNNESS:
- Forlorness means that God doesn’t exist and we have have to face all the consequences
- Basically nothing to follow, have to do things yourself – No guidelines, values
- This impact our lives because we have nothing to look up to and that we have no excuses for our actions
DESPAIR:
- Confine ourselves to reckoning, depends upon our will, or probabilities which make our actions possible
- Since we choose our own values, everyone values differ and as a result, we cannot assume other people are good
- Our environment can affect how we act
- Don’t believe in faith, if things were going bad, no reason to think that it won’t stay that way
- This impacts our lives because it is harder for us to trust people since everyone has different values
WHY HIS VIEWS ARE NOT PLAUSIBLE
- Essence precedes existence because God created us and has already determined a plan for our existence
- for people who do not believe in God, there are already expectations laid upon us by others like our family and people who are close to them SOCIALIZATION
- Forlornness: what about the people who believe in God? They obviously have someone to guide them and look up to
Q23: Sartre contrasts Existentialist humanism and Absurd humanism. Existentialist humanism is an awareness of the world we live in and that the values and goals we create are set by mankind and not determined by any outside force; be it a god, nature or anything other than us. Absurd humanism is, in Satre's words, “we ascribe a value to man on the basis of the highest deeds of certain men”. This means that mankind is constantly improving, based upon the rapid growth of technology and the constant achievements of humans. As to which type of humanism Sartre prefers, he endorses existentialist humanism. He prefers existentialist humanism because absurd humanism is essentially the same as giving someone undue credit. It allows us to take pride in things we never accomplished.
Our Opinion
- The existentialist point of view is more plausible because it dictates that humanity sets its own goals and values, deciding what it thinks is most important and what is right and wrong
- An example would be a soldier in Nazi Germany, following orders from his superiors to kill civilians; he knows that he has a choice to follow orders or not
- The absurd humanism point of view would state that he was given orders from a superior, and that he had no choice but to obey
- The existentialist humanism point of view would state that he made a willing choice to murder innocents, and although he was ordered to by a superior, he still had the option to listen or not
Q25: Explain why Tolstoy sunk into a depression in spite of the outward success he seemed to be having with every aspect of his life. Explain why you do, or don't, find his reaction justified?
Tolstoy
- Assumed there was a simple answer to the question: what is the meaning of life?
- Plagued by questions relating to 'the point' of most of his actions and accomplishments.
- Had everything in life yet found no meaning in his life
- Felt his work was pointless because he did not believe people would remember his work
- Believed peasants had a better life than him because of their faith
- Wondered how he could develop the same faith
Our opinion:
We believe his reaction is not justified because he has everything a person would want, compared to others. The reasons that Tolstoy had for his actions, his desires, now seemed to him purely 'subjective' and there was no 'objective' purpose behind them. We find Tolstoy's theory/belief of Peasants having a meaningful life not valid because like every person, neither rich or poor everyone suffers. He could've found meaning in his life elsewhere, such as his family, reputation. More things in the world to explore. He should not think of the negative aspects of his life and focus on the present things going on through his life; family. He knows the meaning of his life is through faith.
QUESTION 26
What is the difference, for James, between the “healthy minded” tempermant, and the “sick soul”, and what are the differences between what is required to make each type of person happy? Explain which of the two would-views you find more compelling and why.
HEALTHY MIND:
- Think positive and that there is a solution to every problem
- Do not worry about problems as much as the sick soul
- Try to solve any problems right away or they would ignore it an try to come back to it later
WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE THEM HAPPY
- Removes tension from what is wrong in the world
SICK SOUL:
- Very sensetive to problems that arise
- Think about the future negatively, world will eventually end and this causes them to be unhappy
- If problems arise, instead of just solving it right away, they evaluate all their options and choices
WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MAKE THEM HAPPY
- If they are not satisfied, they feel hopeless, they always want to achieve something better
WHICH IS MORE COMPELLING AND WHY:
- The healthy mind is more compelling because they are removing the tension from their life which makes them happier
Q27: “we have a right to believe the physical order to be only a partial order… we have a right to supplement it by an unseen spiritual order which we assume on trust, if only thereby life may seem to us better worth living again” (ILWL pp. 5-6)
- Therefore James believes that as humans we are required to believe in a larger reality followed by the existing world because it is the only way to give meaning to our life.
- Need to define the healthy minded and the sick soul and their perspective on life, since they healthy minded don’t need to be born twice.
by
jhjvhjhvjc (student)
