Moral and Existential Philosophy

What is morality/ethics?What is morality/ethics?

Anything that deals with the question of Anything that deals with the question of good vs. evil. good vs. evil.

Moral actions are always directed towards Moral actions are always directed towards other subjectsother subjects

AnthropomorphismAnthropomorphism Good is good because it brings welfare to Good is good because it brings welfare to

other subjects while evil does the otherwiseother subjects while evil does the otherwise What is good and evil then? This is the What is good and evil then? This is the

question that moral philosophers attempt to question that moral philosophers attempt to answeranswer

Importance of moral Importance of moral philosophyphilosophy

Classical philosophers have one Classical philosophers have one central concern in mind: What is the central concern in mind: What is the right way to live? right way to live?

All other discussions about All other discussions about metaphysics, epistemology, and metaphysics, epistemology, and aesthetics go towards their aesthetics go towards their arguments about the right way to arguments about the right way to live, i.e. moralitylive, i.e. morality

Why moral and existential Why moral and existential philosophy?philosophy?

Moral actions are not only measured Moral actions are not only measured by the consequences they have on by the consequences they have on other subjects, but by the intentother subjects, but by the intent

E.g. man-slaughter vs. murder, E.g. man-slaughter vs. murder, juvenile vs. adult crimesjuvenile vs. adult crimes

Morality presupposes freewillMorality presupposes freewill Existential philosophy deals with the Existential philosophy deals with the

implications of freewillimplications of freewill

Topics in Moral PhilosophyTopics in Moral Philosophy

Meta-ethicsMeta-ethics

(the origins and nature of ethics)(the origins and nature of ethics) Normative ethicsNormative ethics

(what makes an act good or evil?)(what makes an act good or evil?) Applied ethicsApplied ethics

(application of meta-ethics and (application of meta-ethics and normative ethics onto everyday normative ethics onto everyday issues, e.g. abortion)issues, e.g. abortion)

Meta-ethicsMeta-ethics

Two origins of morality:Two origins of morality: Other-worldly: the divine, e.g. God, Heaven, Other-worldly: the divine, e.g. God, Heaven,

etc.etc. This-worldly: biology, psychology, culture, This-worldly: biology, psychology, culture,

i.e. nature or nurture?i.e. nature or nurture?

Epistemological problem: how do we know Epistemological problem: how do we know where morality comes from?where morality comes from?

Semantics: what do we mean by good or evil? Semantics: what do we mean by good or evil? Is lying necessarily evil?Is lying necessarily evil?

Why meta-ethics?Why meta-ethics? Moral absolutism/universalism: to find Moral absolutism/universalism: to find

absolute criteria for moral action and intentabsolute criteria for moral action and intent E.g. Morality is intended by God; good is E.g. Morality is intended by God; good is

what God does and bad is what the devil what God does and bad is what the devil does (problem of judgment)does (problem of judgment)

Problem: if there are absolute criteria for Problem: if there are absolute criteria for good and evil, does that mean we have no good and evil, does that mean we have no freewill? If we cannot judge what is good or freewill? If we cannot judge what is good or evil, how can we claim to have chosen evil, how can we claim to have chosen good over evil?good over evil?

This-world sources: biology and This-world sources: biology and psychologypsychology

Biology: we are programmed to behave in Biology: we are programmed to behave in certain manners (e.g. Dawkins’ The Selfish certain manners (e.g. Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene). But how do we account for our Gene). But how do we account for our differences? How about freewill?differences? How about freewill?

Psychology: what are the intentions behind Psychology: what are the intentions behind being moral? Are all moral actions motivated being moral? Are all moral actions motivated by egoism? Why do strangers risk their lives by egoism? Why do strangers risk their lives for other strangers? Are moral actions due for other strangers? Are moral actions due to individual agency? Then it makes no to individual agency? Then it makes no sense to speak of moral absolutes!sense to speak of moral absolutes!

This-world sources: cultureThis-world sources: culture

Moral relativism: what is good or evil Moral relativism: what is good or evil depends on the cultural contextsdepends on the cultural contexts

Can we reduce everything to culture? Can we reduce everything to culture? E.g. “it is other people’s culture to E.g. “it is other people’s culture to engage in honor-killing”engage in honor-killing”

Should we intervene in the name of Should we intervene in the name of moral absolutes? E.g. free Muslim moral absolutes? E.g. free Muslim women from wearing the Hijabwomen from wearing the Hijab

Normative ethicsNormative ethics

Searching for a single principle to Searching for a single principle to guide our actions.guide our actions.

Three primary perspectives:Three primary perspectives: Virtue theoryVirtue theory Deontology (Kant)Deontology (Kant) UtilitarianismUtilitarianism

Virtue TheoryVirtue Theory

Developing good virtues that results in good Developing good virtues that results in good actionsactions

E.g. courage, compassion, wisdom, humility, E.g. courage, compassion, wisdom, humility, benevolencebenevolence

E.g. Aristotle and Confucius: the golden E.g. Aristotle and Confucius: the golden meanmean

Emphasis on good education Emphasis on good education

Problem: why are these virtues good? Should Problem: why are these virtues good? Should we be compassionate towards tyrants? we be compassionate towards tyrants?

Deontology: Immanuel KantDeontology: Immanuel Kant

Non-consequentialist: fulfil the duty Non-consequentialist: fulfil the duty without regards for consequences without regards for consequences

The Categorical Imperative: Kant’s The Categorical Imperative: Kant’s synthesis of the concerns for synthesis of the concerns for universalism, freewill, reason, and universalism, freewill, reason, and this-worldly sources of moralitythis-worldly sources of morality

Arriving at the Categorical Arriving at the Categorical ImperativeImperative

The synthetic apriori propositionThe synthetic apriori proposition

Analytic apriori: truth-preserving and Analytic apriori: truth-preserving and before experiencesbefore experiences

Synthetic aposteriori: knowledge Synthetic aposteriori: knowledge expanding and after experiencesexpanding and after experiences

Moral principles must be knowledge-Moral principles must be knowledge-expanding so that we can know how to expanding so that we can know how to act, and they must be apriori so that they act, and they must be apriori so that they are universal and unadulterated by are universal and unadulterated by subjective experiencessubjective experiences

Kant’s synthesisKant’s synthesis

Morality must come from freewill, if not Morality must come from freewill, if not they are meaninglessthey are meaningless

Freewill comes from exercise of reason, if Freewill comes from exercise of reason, if not we are mere slaves to desires or not we are mere slaves to desires or biological laws (hypothetical imperative) biological laws (hypothetical imperative) you should not like what you are doing!you should not like what you are doing!

Universal because all humans have reason Universal because all humans have reason Reason is unadulterated by experience for Reason is unadulterated by experience for

we are all born with itwe are all born with it

Synthetic aprioriSynthetic apriori

Example: Cause and effectExample: Cause and effect

Notion of cause and effect has apriori origins: Notion of cause and effect has apriori origins: we all intuitively see A as a cause of B. we all intuitively see A as a cause of B.

Synthetic: we apply our intuition about cause Synthetic: we apply our intuition about cause and effect onto the systematic study of and effect onto the systematic study of nature – Sciencenature – Science

Synthetic apriori: merely an explication of Synthetic apriori: merely an explication of intuition? intuition?

The Categorical ImperativeThe Categorical Imperative

Reason tells us: “Act on maxim that you can Reason tells us: “Act on maxim that you can will to be universal law”will to be universal law”

Synthetic: tells us how to behave in any given Synthetic: tells us how to behave in any given situation, long as I can will any principle to situation, long as I can will any principle to be a universal lawbe a universal law

Isn’t that the same as the principle: “do unto Isn’t that the same as the principle: “do unto others what you want others to do unto others what you want others to do unto you”!you”!

Critiques of KantCritiques of Kant Problem 1: I would want it to be a universal law, Problem 1: I would want it to be a universal law,

i.e. I want others to do it. But that doesn’t mean i.e. I want others to do it. But that doesn’t mean that I myself should do it!that I myself should do it!

Problem 2: Why should I obey my reason only? Problem 2: Why should I obey my reason only? Am I not also an emotional being?Am I not also an emotional being?

Problem 3: Is freewill really that important? Problem 3: Is freewill really that important? What good does freewill bring? Erich Fromm: What good does freewill bring? Erich Fromm: Escape from Freedom: people do not want Escape from Freedom: people do not want choices for it leads to angst (Nazi Holocaust)choices for it leads to angst (Nazi Holocaust)

Problem 4: reason not that universal Problem 4: reason not that universal (Sadomasochist would want everyone to hurt (Sadomasochist would want everyone to hurt themselves, someone suffering from chronic themselves, someone suffering from chronic sickness would want euthanasia for everyone)sickness would want euthanasia for everyone)

Problem 5: sticking to duty may result in a lot of Problem 5: sticking to duty may result in a lot of suffering for others (E.g. Killing Hitler to save the suffering for others (E.g. Killing Hitler to save the world, capital punishment)world, capital punishment)

Critiques of Kant IICritiques of Kant II

Problem 6: is it reason that tells me to will it Problem 6: is it reason that tells me to will it to be universal law?to be universal law?

Hume: reason is always a slave to passionHume: reason is always a slave to passion Moral preferences no different from artistic ones: Moral preferences no different from artistic ones:

they are results of passion rather than reasonthey are results of passion rather than reason The only universal is human potential for The only universal is human potential for

‘sympathy’: being able to feel what others feel. ‘sympathy’: being able to feel what others feel. But the action that comes after is another But the action that comes after is another questionquestion

If it is passion rather than reason, makes it a If it is passion rather than reason, makes it a hypothetical imperative, and therefore not hypothetical imperative, and therefore not product of freewill? If not product of freewill does product of freewill? If not product of freewill does it make morality meaningless? it make morality meaningless?

Critiques of Kant IIICritiques of Kant III

Problem 7: The exercise of reason becomes Problem 7: The exercise of reason becomes enslaving: I enslaving: I mustmust do what reason tells me to. do what reason tells me to. That’s a paradox! That’s a paradox!

Durkheimian solution: reason, categorical Durkheimian solution: reason, categorical imperative, etc. have origins in society. Inasmuch imperative, etc. have origins in society. Inasmuch as society does not want to give us too much or as society does not want to give us too much or too little freewill, reason has come to be the tool too little freewill, reason has come to be the tool that develops such behaviors in usthat develops such behaviors in us

Elementary forms of religious life: respect is the Elementary forms of religious life: respect is the emotional manifestation of the paradox of reason: emotional manifestation of the paradox of reason: free and not free = love and fear free and not free = love and fear “respect” “respect”

Utilitarianism: the maximization of Utilitarianism: the maximization of general happinessgeneral happiness

Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart MillJeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill

An act is morally good if the end result An act is morally good if the end result maximizes general welfaremaximizes general welfare

E.g. Killing Hitler to save millions of livesE.g. Killing Hitler to save millions of lives

A consequentialist conception of morality: A consequentialist conception of morality: the ends justify the meansthe ends justify the means

Critiques of UtilitarianismCritiques of Utilitarianism Problem 1: technical problem. How can I predict the Problem 1: technical problem. How can I predict the

consequences of my action? Perhaps killing Hitler will not end consequences of my action? Perhaps killing Hitler will not end the war but make it worse? Probability and causality problem.the war but make it worse? Probability and causality problem.

Problem 2: what do we mean by welfare? Maybe others don’t Problem 2: what do we mean by welfare? Maybe others don’t want whatever we mean by welfare? E.g. Liberating Afghan want whatever we mean by welfare? E.g. Liberating Afghan women from the Hijab. women from the Hijab.

Problem 3: contradiction with deontology – should a doctor lie to Problem 3: contradiction with deontology – should a doctor lie to his patient about the latter’s illness? his patient about the latter’s illness?

Problem 4: discount the Problem 4: discount the quality quality of each individual. But ‘welfare’ of each individual. But ‘welfare’ has a qualitative dimension, e.g. ‘happiness’ and each human has a qualitative dimension, e.g. ‘happiness’ and each human understand and experience ‘happiness’ differentlyunderstand and experience ‘happiness’ differentlyApplication to distributive justice: allocate resources so that total Application to distributive justice: allocate resources so that total welfare is maximized. E.g. split up a liver to give to two persons welfare is maximized. E.g. split up a liver to give to two persons or give it to an old man to prolong his life? or give it to an old man to prolong his life?

Problem 5: purely future oriented so it discounts retributive Problem 5: purely future oriented so it discounts retributive justice justice E.g. Give organ to a doctor rather than a war veteranE.g. Give organ to a doctor rather than a war veteran

Problem 6: how to calculate ‘maximum welfare’? Should I kill 1 Problem 6: how to calculate ‘maximum welfare’? Should I kill 1 million people infected with virus in order to save 1 million and 1 million people infected with virus in order to save 1 million and 1 people? What if the 1 million includes people like Mother people? What if the 1 million includes people like Mother Theresa?Theresa?

Other theories: human Other theories: human rightsrights

Rights theory: it is morally good to let people Rights theory: it is morally good to let people exercise their rightsexercise their rightsRights and duties are two sides of a coin: others Rights and duties are two sides of a coin: others have a duty to respect my rightshave a duty to respect my rights

E.g. Locke’s ‘natural rights theory’: laws of nature E.g. Locke’s ‘natural rights theory’: laws of nature mandate that we should not harm anyone’s life, mandate that we should not harm anyone’s life, health, liberty or possessionshealth, liberty or possessions

Problem: how do we know what laws of nature are? Problem: how do we know what laws of nature are? Even if we can, why should we follow them? Some Even if we can, why should we follow them? Some say laws of nature dictates that we are all say laws of nature dictates that we are all heterosexuals, does that mean that homosexuals heterosexuals, does that mean that homosexuals should be eliminated? Do laws of nature come from should be eliminated? Do laws of nature come from observing what other animals do? If that is the observing what other animals do? If that is the case then we should not wear clothes, use utensils, case then we should not wear clothes, use utensils, comb our hair, etc. comb our hair, etc.

Four principles of moral Four principles of moral rightsrights

First, rights are First, rights are naturalnatural insofar as they are not invented or insofar as they are not invented or created by governments. created by governments.

Second, they are Second, they are universaluniversal insofar as they do not change from insofar as they do not change from country to country. country to country.

Third, they are Third, they are equalequal in the sense that rights are the same for all in the sense that rights are the same for all people, irrespective of gender, race, or handicap. people, irrespective of gender, race, or handicap.

Fourth, they are Fourth, they are inalienableinalienable which means that I cannot hand over which means that I cannot hand over my rights to another person, such as by selling myself into my rights to another person, such as by selling myself into slavery.slavery.

Problem 1: Why do we have these rights? What are the foundations Problem 1: Why do we have these rights? What are the foundations of these rights? Are they needs or desires? There is always a of these rights? Are they needs or desires? There is always a need to…what is the to? need to…what is the to?

Problem 2: we don’t even know what human nature is, how can we Problem 2: we don’t even know what human nature is, how can we talk about what is natural and what is universal? Is there no such talk about what is natural and what is universal? Is there no such thing as culture? Are we merely products of nature? thing as culture? Are we merely products of nature?

Applied EthicsApplied Ethics

Abortion:Abortion: Rights of baby vs. rights of motherRights of baby vs. rights of mother Does a baby have a right? What makes a human? Does a baby have a right? What makes a human?

AnthropomorphismAnthropomorphism Deontology vs. utilitarianism: duty not to kill, but Deontology vs. utilitarianism: duty not to kill, but

allowing baby to live may make it and the mother allowing baby to live may make it and the mother suffer moresuffer more

Euthanasia:Euthanasia: Same issue with abortionSame issue with abortion Quality of life vs. quantity of life (question of what Quality of life vs. quantity of life (question of what

we mean by ‘welfare’)we mean by ‘welfare’) ‘‘Sanctity of life’: meta-ethical question (e.g. if Sanctity of life’: meta-ethical question (e.g. if

God does not exist then it is meaningless to talk God does not exist then it is meaningless to talk about sanctity of life)about sanctity of life)

Some principles of applied Some principles of applied ethicsethics

Personal benefit: Personal benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for the individual action produces beneficial consequences for the individual in question (utilitarianism)in question (utilitarianism)

Social benefit:Social benefit: acknowledge the extent to which an action acknowledge the extent to which an action produces beneficial consequences for society produces beneficial consequences for society (utilitarianism)(utilitarianism)

Principle of benevolence:Principle of benevolence: help those in need (virtue theory, help those in need (virtue theory, deontology)deontology)

Principle of paternalism: Principle of paternalism: assist others in pursuing their best assist others in pursuing their best interests when they cannot do so themselves (deontology)interests when they cannot do so themselves (deontology)

Principle of harm: Principle of harm: do not harm others (deontology)do not harm others (deontology) Principle of honesty: Principle of honesty: do not deceive others (deontology)do not deceive others (deontology) Principle of lawfulness:Principle of lawfulness: do not violate the law (deontology) do not violate the law (deontology) Principle of autonomy: Principle of autonomy: acknowledge a person’s freedom acknowledge a person’s freedom

over his/her actions or physical body (deontology)over his/her actions or physical body (deontology) Principle of justice: Principle of justice: acknowledge a person’s right to due acknowledge a person’s right to due

process, fair compensation for harm done, and fair process, fair compensation for harm done, and fair distribution of benefits (rights theory)distribution of benefits (rights theory)

Rights: Rights: acknowledge a person’s rights to life, information, acknowledge a person’s rights to life, information, privacy, free expression, and safety (rights theory)privacy, free expression, and safety (rights theory)

What is existential What is existential philosophy?philosophy?

Human existence is different from that of animals Human existence is different from that of animals because we know that we exist as free individuals distinct because we know that we exist as free individuals distinct from the worldfrom the world

This knowledge comes from the ability of consciousness This knowledge comes from the ability of consciousness to be conscious of itselfto be conscious of itself

What then makes me so? Why and how am I so? What What then makes me so? Why and how am I so? What shall I do with it?shall I do with it?

““The laws of God, the laws of man,The laws of God, the laws of man,He may keep that will and canHe may keep that will and canAnd how am I to face the oddsAnd how am I to face the odds

Of man's bedevilment and God's?Of man's bedevilment and God's?I, a stranger and afraidI, a stranger and afraid

In a world I never made”In a world I never made”

: - A. E. Housman, on being a homosexual in a heterosexual : - A. E. Housman, on being a homosexual in a heterosexual worldworld

Existential Existential philosophers/writersphilosophers/writers

Friedrich NietzscheFriedrich Nietzsche Soren KierkegaardSoren Kierkegaard Martin HeideggerMartin Heidegger Jean-paul SartreJean-paul Sartre Albert Camus Albert Camus Theodore DostoevskyTheodore Dostoevsky Maurice Merleu-pontyMaurice Merleu-ponty

Jean-paul Sartre: Jean-paul Sartre: We are condemned to freedomWe are condemned to freedom Ontological position: set out to deal Ontological position: set out to deal

with what it means to be humanwith what it means to be human

Epistemological position: via analyzing Epistemological position: via analyzing the nature of human consciousnessthe nature of human consciousness

Ethical position: morality is meaningful Ethical position: morality is meaningful insofar as actions are chosen and not insofar as actions are chosen and not coercedcoerced

Nature of consciousnessNature of consciousness From Edmund Husserl: there is no such thing as From Edmund Husserl: there is no such thing as

‘pure’ consciousness; consciousness is always ‘pure’ consciousness; consciousness is always consciousness of somethingconsciousness of something

Consciousness is directional, i.e. intendedConsciousness is directional, i.e. intended

When I am conscious I am always conscious of When I am conscious I am always conscious of something. This makes me conscious of the act of something. This makes me conscious of the act of consciousness, which precludes the one who is consciousness, which precludes the one who is conscious – I. I am therefore responsible for all conscious – I. I am therefore responsible for all acts of consciousness, regardless of how acts of consciousness, regardless of how spontaneous my consciousness isspontaneous my consciousness is

Implication for psychology: Implication for psychology: we always have we always have choices, unlike Freud’s argument that there are choices, unlike Freud’s argument that there are factors beyond the grasp of our consciousness. factors beyond the grasp of our consciousness.

The FleeThe Flee What makes me conscious of A rather than B?What makes me conscious of A rather than B?

Consciousness always suffers from a ‘lack’, and thus it is Consciousness always suffers from a ‘lack’, and thus it is always directed towards that which fills this ‘lack’always directed towards that which fills this ‘lack’

Consciousness has no content; it is a fleeing towards the Consciousness has no content; it is a fleeing towards the world in search of world in search of beingbeing

The fact that we can ask questions shows us the The fact that we can ask questions shows us the transcendental and the temporal nature of consciousness transcendental and the temporal nature of consciousness and the nothingness of being. and the nothingness of being.

Freedom not defined as ability to act, but the ability to be Freedom not defined as ability to act, but the ability to be free in thoughts. We are so free that we are unable to not free in thoughts. We are so free that we are unable to not make choices! (Bourdieu: provided we are always make choices! (Bourdieu: provided we are always conscious. But many a times we act unconsciously conscious. But many a times we act unconsciously because we are embodied creatures.)because we are embodied creatures.)

Facticity and FreedomFacticity and Freedom I often think I am a unity, but the act of being self-I often think I am a unity, but the act of being self-

conscious makes me a duality or a multiplicity: the conscious makes me a duality or a multiplicity: the one who reflects and the one who is the object of one who reflects and the one who is the object of reflection, the one who reflects upon the one who reflection, the one who reflects upon the one who reflects and the one who is the object of reflection reflects and the one who is the object of reflection and so onand so on

Yet we still seek unity or what Sartre calls ‘being’. Yet we still seek unity or what Sartre calls ‘being’. Consciousness is uncomfortable with its freedom. Consciousness is uncomfortable with its freedom.

Insofar as we are always conscious, human ontology Insofar as we are always conscious, human ontology is always unstable, for consciousness is always in is always unstable, for consciousness is always in flight, denying its being in search of other beings. flight, denying its being in search of other beings. “We are not what we are and we are what we are “We are not what we are and we are what we are not”not”

Any being is a facticity that lies in the past, and every Any being is a facticity that lies in the past, and every act of being conscious of this facticity is an act of act of being conscious of this facticity is an act of freedom in its seeking of facticity. My being is freedom in its seeking of facticity. My being is therefore always suspended in time, in my flight from therefore always suspended in time, in my flight from the here and now to some where and some time else.the here and now to some where and some time else.

Bad Faith: self-deception and Bad Faith: self-deception and inauthenticityinauthenticity

Belief in a stable essence of beingBelief in a stable essence of being A contradiction between being a facticity A contradiction between being a facticity

and a freewill. and a freewill. In seeking a being, a person is in an act of In seeking a being, a person is in an act of

freedom that denies freedom. After settling freedom that denies freedom. After settling into a being, it does not mean that the into a being, it does not mean that the consciousness extinguishes itself. But in consciousness extinguishes itself. But in order to achieve stability in being, people order to achieve stability in being, people give themselves all sorts of justifications. give themselves all sorts of justifications. E.g. ‘fate’, ‘God’, ‘society’, ‘no choice’. Bad E.g. ‘fate’, ‘God’, ‘society’, ‘no choice’. Bad faith is essentially a form of self-deception. faith is essentially a form of self-deception.

Ontological, traditional, positivistic, stoical Ontological, traditional, positivistic, stoical

Sartre’s pointSartre’s point The underlying motivation for action is to be The underlying motivation for action is to be

found in the nature of consciousness, which is a found in the nature of consciousness, which is a desire for being. Each person must exercise his desire for being. Each person must exercise his freedom in such a way that he does not lose sight freedom in such a way that he does not lose sight of his existence as a facticity and as a free human of his existence as a facticity and as a free human being. Only in so doing can he understand the being. Only in so doing can he understand the relationships between choices and the values relationships between choices and the values therefore projected. Authenticity is the therefore projected. Authenticity is the recognition of how our freedom interacts with our recognition of how our freedom interacts with our facticity, and not utter freedom. facticity, and not utter freedom.

Facticity refers to the past that is already given. It Facticity refers to the past that is already given. It is a being that cannot be freed. Everything else is a being that cannot be freed. Everything else that comes after that can be chosen. that comes after that can be chosen.

Sartre’s EthicsSartre’s Ethics

There is no apriori normative moral values There is no apriori normative moral values in our actions, but in choosing, the agent in our actions, but in choosing, the agent creates the value the same way an artist creates the value the same way an artist does in his drawing. These values are does in his drawing. These values are universal because humans are, so any universal because humans are, so any artist put in my situation will be able to artist put in my situation will be able to make sense of those valuesmake sense of those values

The value of morality lies in the act of The value of morality lies in the act of choosing, and not the act itselfchoosing, and not the act itself

On Human RelationsOn Human Relations Shame and guilt is a product of my awareness Shame and guilt is a product of my awareness

that I have been objectified by the freewill of that I have been objectified by the freewill of others, and to deal with this, I objectify others. others, and to deal with this, I objectify others. Human relationships are therefore constituted by Human relationships are therefore constituted by this constant struggle between trying to be a this constant struggle between trying to be a subject while being aware that one is being subject while being aware that one is being objectified. This is understood as inter-subjective objectified. This is understood as inter-subjective bad faithbad faith

Love is essentially a paradoxical experienceLove is essentially a paradoxical experience

““The desire of a freewill to possess another The desire of a freewill to possess another freewill”freewill”

Implications Implications

Can I ‘choose’ to believe in something?Can I ‘choose’ to believe in something? Am I able to find purpose in this-Am I able to find purpose in this-

worldly values?worldly values? How do I know that I am free?How do I know that I am free? Do I have to be free? What’s so good Do I have to be free? What’s so good

about being free?about being free? Isn’t the act of denying my freedom an Isn’t the act of denying my freedom an

act of freedom too? Suicideact of freedom too? Suicide

Kierkegaard and NietzscheKierkegaard and Nietzsche Nihilism: pushing the limits of reason results in the realization Nihilism: pushing the limits of reason results in the realization

that no value as an inherent value in-itself (cf. Weber). Values that no value as an inherent value in-itself (cf. Weber). Values are therefore human constructs. are therefore human constructs.

Kierkegaard: everything we choose to do and believe in is Kierkegaard: everything we choose to do and believe in is probably wrong. But we must still do so, and stick to it. Faith is probably wrong. But we must still do so, and stick to it. Faith is the only solution to the nihilism that comes from reasoningthe only solution to the nihilism that comes from reasoning

Nietzsche: to craft oneself through oneself, without relying on Nietzsche: to craft oneself through oneself, without relying on anything that transcends one’s life such as God or the soul. anything that transcends one’s life such as God or the soul.

The Ubermensch: one who creatively destroys and creatively The Ubermensch: one who creatively destroys and creatively creates. Values are one’s own constructs, not from external creates. Values are one’s own constructs, not from external transcendental sources. transcendental sources.

Eternal return as illustration of inherent meaninglessness of Eternal return as illustration of inherent meaninglessness of existence: that there is no purpose for everything repeats existence: that there is no purpose for everything repeats itself. Purpose only exists within a single life-time; no purpose itself. Purpose only exists within a single life-time; no purpose transcends a life-time. transcends a life-time.

Miscellaneous notesMiscellaneous notes On fear, angst, and world-opennessOn fear, angst, and world-openness

Consciousness is the cause of all sufferingsConsciousness is the cause of all sufferings

Religion is the consequence of the alienating Religion is the consequence of the alienating effect of consciousnesseffect of consciousness

Monotheistic religion: construct another Monotheistic religion: construct another ‘subject’ to deal with existential loneliness – ‘subject’ to deal with existential loneliness – God or godsGod or gods

Buddhism and Daoism: get rid of consciousnessBuddhism and Daoism: get rid of consciousness