Human nature as a struggle between reason and desire - Essay Example

Human Nature as a Struggle between Reason and Desire Introduction: Philosophy and Films Philosophy explores the abstract problems for universal understanding. It seems far-fetched as to how could it be explained through clearly visible, fixed and immediate thoughts presented in the films. Philosophers have rated understanding through images as most primitive and immature. Pictures and images are suitable to those only who lack more sophisticated expressions (Falzon 3). Plato has stated in Plato's Cave that when inside the cave, shadows on the wall are taken as real by persons not enlightened but the truth is that one need to come out in the sunlight to see reality. (Falzon 4). This prejudice against visual images is further enhanced in cinema. Since there also we sit in the dark hall and see images moving in front of us. Le Doeuff (1989 as cited in Falzon 4) stated that images are illustrative which enter deep and help form our thoughts (Falzon 5). Still some may argue that let films be just films. Why distort or bend these to fit into some philosophical definitions The answer to this may be, using films to interpret philosophy is just one more perspective to looking at these (Falzon 6). One may argue that films are prejudiced in having the maker's view and thus may influence our interpretations. Certainly, but you can use the film as a base to think of presenting the story in different way or find what the maker has left out. We remember longer what we have seen and that continuously constructs our thinking till our reasons satisfy the outcome. Philosophy of Human Nature through Movies In the movie Cape Fear (Scorsese 1991), Max Cady (Robert de Niro) is a vicious redneck who has just served a 14-year prison sentence for a hideout incident of rape and battery. Now, he's arrived to seek vengeance on Sam Bowden (Nick Nolte), the lawyer who defended him but was so repulsed by his client's crime that he buried a crucial piece of evidence. The latter could have reduced severity of Cady's punishment. Scorsese and De Niro are taking the sort of brutish, menacing, perversely unreasonable criminal as a phantom. If there, truly, is such a character in our life then this absolutely self-destructive person presents conflict between passion and reason. Cady begins to practice a sleek form of cat-and-mouse terrorism, and without really stepping outside the law harasses Bowdens. What's more, He feels strongly that Sam, by failing to defend him to the best of his abilities and also stepping outside the law, took it into his own hands. Cady emphasises that, now, he no longer has the right to expect that same law to protect him. Cady seems to have a good reason for his act. He is also trying to save Bowdens' from their sins by punishing them. How does philosophy explain the conduct of Cady and Sam The latter has scores of infidelities as well and thus shows weaknesses in his personality. Was Sam right in deciding that Cady's crime is too repulsive to be allowed any respite And was Cady right in being obsessed with the revenge against Sam's whole family Our reasons, feelings, thought and behaviour are controlled by different parts of minds. Both Freud and Kant consider mind as divided entity rather than a single unit. While hiding the report that could have reduced Cady's punishment, Sam was in conflict between reason and passion (to do lawyers duty well for his client), finally the reason yielded to passion that a criminal of Cady's level should be given severe punishment. It is also possible that during the course of our life, we develop many unconscious thoughts and wishes that keep on influencing our conscious decisions (Critchley et al 169). Similarly the overemphasised view of the fault of Sam, by Cady is due both to breach of trust as well as the conflicts of passion and reason. When the latter two were in harmony, he succeeded in creating fear in Bowdens family. But when these two were in conflict, he lost his own life. Since in conflict the reason opposes such a passion, which is forbidden by morality. Cady could not reason to himself that he wants to kill whole Bowdens family because he spent more years in prison because of Sam, but where will he go after that, back to prison The principle of reason and passion can be applied not only to the violent acts of Cady but to a much more rational character of Casablanca (Curtiz 1942) as well. Humphrey Bogart (Richard Blaine or Rick) wants the girl Ilsa (played by Ingrid Bergman) from his past, and to keep himself out of World War II. Rick is hiding, but when the movie ends and Humphrey and the police captain stroll into the airport fog, does Rick have what he wanted No! He left the girl with her husband though she wanted him. Moreover, he is marching off to physically fight Nazis too. The morals and reason make him sacrifice his own small good (desire) for greater good. Kant maintained that human nature has desires of appetite and other passions, which are common with animals. But humans have reason also, which is disconnected from desire when it opposes desire and operates freely. Here, the human beings are different from animals. Human act on principles after judging its validity by reason rather than on mere impulses (Crichtley 170). When a person is not able to differentiate himself from animals i.e. he remains a slave to his passions, he is self destructive as was Cady. But when reason suppresses futile passion the right path opens up. The passion not supported by reason is just fury of the moment and repentance thereafter. So, Is Max Cady a bad person without any morals and only blind irrational passion Is Rick a changed person after intense encounter with passion and reason The answer to these questions is probably a no! Zen explains man's nature as Buddha nature. It says man has a latent and undeveloped nature, which may be enlightened and developed to apprise reality to its owner. The Buddha nature is everybody's nature, our good or bad deeds are only the enlightenment or no enlightenment. Thus according to Zen man does not have duality of being either good or bad, he is rather Buddha - natured which is the limitation of his inherent nature (Nukariya 106). So both of them, Cady and Rick have reasons and it is only intensity and development that differ in the two. If we elaborate it and put simply, the common sense divides actions into four types. These are purely good actions, partly good partly bad actions, neither good nor bad actions and purely bad actions. The purely good actions are those that neither subserve nor hinder human interests whether material or spiritual, such as humanity and love. Partly good and partly bad actions are both for and against the human interests viz. Narrow patriotism and prejudiced love. Neither good nor bad actions neither harm nor benefit the human interests viz. An unconscious act of a dreamer. Purely bad actions only harm the human interest and only suicide is such an action. Every other action fulfills interest whether material or spiritual in some way. Even the horrible crime such as homicide, which Cady intends, is performed for some interest and aim. In the common sense view thus the man can not perform only good action or purely bad actions all the time, it is matter of judgement at that moment. Man falls in second and third category, he may be good and bad at the same time or neither good nor bad (Nukariya 105). . In Wings of Desire (Wenders 1987) the duality of human nature is captured in yet another way. It is sensual and the spiritual. Damiel (Bruno Ganz), Cassiel and a host of other angels, are all over town following would-be suicides, bitter parents, accident victims, mothers in labour, Turkish immigrants on a drive. They know about the man who intends to kill himself today, sticking his rarest stamps on all his farewell letters. A collective spirit of benevolence, the angels listen in without judgment and with pity. When Damiel is in love, he realises that he needs sensation. He sacrifices his immortal angelic status to be a mortal, a man. The movie supports Hobbes views about felicity. He stated that happiness is not in having achieved what one desired but keeps on achieving and that is felicity. He further says that it is the dynamic pursuit of happiness rather than static one that human nature goes after. Hobbes philosophy of human nature is materialistic as reasons are derived by sensations (Pamerleau 171). If someone can not see then how to describe him the colour red Haneke (The time of the wolf, 2003) imagines this brutal time sometimes in future. Horses are killed for their meat. Young Eva (Anais Demoustier) awakens to see a girl being raped at knifepoint inside the safe confines of the railroad station as the community sleeps around them. This is not a safe time and bad people are out there, no longer held back from doing bad things. Even Eva's newfound friend is a bit of a thief, and while Eva's raising and family keep her away from doing anything for survival, he is not above that. A new dimension of morality appears here that states our morality is a result of our upbringing initially but, as discussed below, is affected by our perceptions. The film is a poignant social commentary that haunts you long till you discover a meaning to such human behaviour. Materialism is inherent part of human nature. For e.g. a hungry man has a reason to eat and the reason stops there. Haneke's presentation too is well explained by Hobbes. He does not boast about human emotions and wills. He does not find any qualitative difference between human and beast emotions. Animals also care for their offspring, feed, shelter and protect them He however, says that there is only a quantitative difference on account of human reason and linguistic abilities (Pamerleau 172). Hobbes exaggerates the role of power in human psychology. The man is greedily seeking power and dominance over fellow humans and this pursuit is with great self-interest only. He refers human reason as mere calculation to fulfill desires. Hobbes refers freedom as release from constraints rather than means of having independent choice. While morality is how action is perceived by others who are affected by it (Pamerleau 1997 172). Hume also finds reason an inert entity, which comes after the action has occurred (Hume pars5-6). Hume further explains that morals influence affections and passions while reason does not have that ability. So morality is not the outcome of reason. Hume says that actions are not results of reason neither the reason can immediately contradict or approve an action. Our actions may be good or evil but not reasonable or unreasonable. It is the conscience or the sense of moral that actively influences an action. So do we exaggerate reason in Cady and Rick's case above It is clear revenge (passion) suppressing reason in the former while rationality of sacrifice outweighs desire in the latter. The clarity of human nature in these two derives explanation in terms of reason Vs Desire. There is no complicated element involved. There still is great importance of perception. While Cady could not perceive the consequences of his passion, Rick perceived well that he should leave Ilsa with her husband and make his contribution to war for a satisfying life. Conclusion: Many philosophers are skeptic about reason. Hume states that morality is guided by perception rather than reason. He elaborates that all our actions viz. Seeing, hearing, loving, judging, feeling etc fall under perception. It is a very simple fact that the mind can not initiate an action if it does not perceive it. The perception is divided into impression and idea. It is through our ideas or impressions that we distinguish between vice and virtue and take action that may be deplorable or praiseworthy. The reason is inert which can not helps us to choose good or bad (Hume pars1-3). We can reason every act whether virtuous or selfish. Similarly the empiricists also believe that primary role in perception is of senses and that reason has a secondary role. They state that experience is necessary for knowledge and the senses are necessary for experiences (Falzon 36). This is the reason that makes angel Damiel (Wings of desire) relieves himself of angel status to be a man, so that he could feel the sensation and gain the knowledge of that feeling. We can not deny the rationalists views fully here though. As Plato and Descartes believe that perception by senses alone is prone to illusion and deception. To understand the reality, reason is also necessary (Falzon 33). But if both Cady and Sam (Cape Fear) have their reasons to commit their deeds or if such a society, as Haneke (the time of the wolf) has imagined, happens then human reasoning is rather complicated subject. Such action whether real or imagined may find answer in Locke's views who proposes that the perspectives condition our perceptions, Say, male and female, conservative etc. Perspectives colour our experiences e.g. corruption and biases may shadow our thoughts and hence actions. So mere experience does not give us knowledge, reason is also necessary (Falzon 43-46). Locke though similar in views to Hume but does not overlook reason. Though the reason certainly comes after perception and experience and at times makes it believable that reason can not prevent a passion ,it only obeys. Hume further simplifies his view by asserting that we are attracted to or repulsed by an object when we sense pleasure or pain from it. Hume says reason does not have ability to give us that sensation. The depictions in the movies presented here are explained better by Hobbes and Hume's philosophy. Locke also questions, is body different from spirituality To be a person, Locke asserts, it is necessary to have reason, consciousness and self-consciousness. There may be bodily changes over the time but the continuity of memory (consciousness) makes one the same person (Falzon 70). That is the reason, even freedom after a very long sentence could not stop Cady going to extreme in his revenge against Sam. Films present a certain view and are prejudiced thus are very different from natural human nature. Movies only create curiosity to understand human nature. These can not be ideal models to judge validity of philosophical principles. WORK CITED Critchley, Simon, W. R. Schroeder and J. M. Bernstein. A Companion to Continental Philosophy. Blackwell Publishing, 1999. Falzon, Christopher. Philosophy Goes to the Movies: An Introduction to Philosophy Routledge, 2002 Hume, David. Sect. i. "Moral Distinctions Not Derived from Reason". In: A treatise of Human Nature by David Hume. 3 Jan 2009. http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/h/hume/david/h92t/B3.1.1.html Nukariya, Kaiten. The Religion of the Samurai: A Study of Zen Philosophy and Discipline in China and Japan, Cosimo, Inc., 2005. Pomerleau, Wayne P. Twelve Great Philosophers: A Historical Introduction to Human Nature. Rowman & Littlefield, 1997 FILMS Curtiz, Michael. Casablanca (1942) Haneke, Michael. Time of the Wolf (2003) Scorsese, Martin. Cape Fear (1991) Wenders, Wim. Wings of Desire (1987) Read More