When Banach talks about the existentialist view of human freedom and attempts to figure out what precedes what, essence or existence, it made me question why does it matter? Why do we have to have a set rule for everything? Why can't some objects' existence be established after its purpose was created? And why can't other objects' existence come before its purpose? And another possibility can be that sometimes something's existence might not even have to have a destined way of life. Why does Banach insist to look at existence from two extreme point of views where the concepts of "Existence precedes essence" and "Essence precedes existence" is applied as such a general statement to all that exists?
I believe that humans don't have a preconceived destiny or purpose. I mean, I haven't even found my essence yet. I don't know what I want to do with myself or who I really am yet. How do we even find our essence? What if what we found to be our essence is just something we convinced ourselves to be? I mean, is it like a sudden epiphany moment where you know for sure who you are or is it something you develop over time?
I do agree though that "man is free, man is freedom." We might not have full control of "the various elements within our experience that come from outside us, but we can view them and combine them in any way we like." We have the power of editing the way our surroundings are presented to us in our minds. But what's the use of having freedom in our minds, if we're still limited to the physical ways we are allowed to represent our thoughts? Banach says "...what we shall make of ourselves is up to us" and the "BE AUTHENTIC". He keeps repeating the concept of mental freedom, where we're allowed to think whatever and however we want. But how are we supposed to think freely when our minds are bombarded with dozens of remarks and opinions daily. For me, I'm pretty sure half or probably even more of these comments will slide subconsciously into the back of my mind and alter the way I think about things even without realizing it. Is that my fault? Would that mean that I don't know how to use my freedom correctly and that I can't think for myself?
This reminds me of the discussion we had in Snyder's class about how important it is for people to think for themselves. How do we learn to think and come up with ideas for ourselves? Ideas that we ourselves come up with rather than "regurgitating" the things we hear (which is exactly what I'm doing now with our class discussion). What if I thought of something completely out of the blue without any type of outside influence and coincidentally enough, the thought was said elsewhere. Does that mean my comment isn't original or authentic just because someone else came up with it? What if we heard a phrase or a saying that we completely found ourselves connecting with, does that mean we're submitting to outside influence because we're taking statements made in our "TV screens" and letting them interfere with our mind's process? Do we have to figure everything out on our own in order to be an absolute individual who uses his/her mind's freedom to its fullest extent by not letting any interruptions from our daily interactions mess with our thinking?
Self-deception according to Banach is someone who subjects to a role, whether through his body, brain, personality or hormones. However, he says we still have the freedom to choose which role we want to play so freedom is inescapable. So is he trying to say that our true "self" is basically our minds and that what we are physically doesn't represent the real us at all? And that our decision to play a role such as a mother, teacher, or friend, is an act of betrayal to our minds? He says we are so much more than just a role and that this physical aspect of our lives don't represent who we really are at all. I don't understand. Why can't we project our mind, our "self" into our roles? If I'm talking to a friend, why can't I represent my mind and its thoughts through the contents that I'm talking about? How would that be deceiving my self? We might not be able to fully express our minds through conversations and "role playing", but I don't think they're considered deceitful. I don't think we're living lies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Carrie,
ReplyDeleteI love how you are always so insightful. Questioning the reason behind why any of it matters ( existence vs. essence) is something that should be brought up about a lot of things. Why does any of it matter when in truth you will probably never get a definite answer. It is just something that can not have one specific view on it but has many.
I never really thought about the whole idea of essence in relation to ourselves. I also do not know what to do with my life or if I even have a purpose. But I do believe that it is something that you either know since a young age or its something that you learn on the way. As you go though life there will moments where you think to yourself this is it, this is what I'm good at and other moments where you are going to question everything you have done so far.
I agree with you that its hard to be a complete individual when everything is influencing our lives 24/7. Though I agree with Banach that what makes us free, even though we can not help how we are made or what we hear is how we use the outside influences to shape ourselves and create ourselves outside the norm of everything else. Because not everyone will shape themselves as you shape yourself using what influences you.
I love your post. You brought up many interesting questions in which made me think alot about my life. I also feel like I need to say that in thinking about all of this, you will just confuse yourself or be even more subjective to other peoples points of view and you just need to live the life you want. Cause in any way we go about our existence we have no real say or freedom and we are not individuals. So why bother? Hope to read more from you!
I like the feel of this blog post, it becomes very thought provoking and insightful as the post goes on. I liked how you were able to connect the idea of what "genuine" is to the idea of regurgitating what we're told. They're very related concepts, I would have liked if you took this idea and went further with it. For instance, how can you tell when someone regurgitates ideas or answers? How can you get a genuine response out of someone? What else to people regurgitate outside of speech and ideas? how can you get those things to be genuine? there are a lot of questions to be posed in that idea, your post would be more compelling if you had asked and addressed those questions, or questions of your own.
ReplyDeleteI thought your ideas on destiny were very interesting. You compared the idea of destiny to your own life and were able to address large questions in a simple way that readers could understand. I like the idea that destiny is when your essence is predetermined, this is a very concise definition of what destiny is. All in all, good post, I liked the way you were able to convey your ideas in a clear way, keep up the good work