Is Sartre's Existentialist account of morality more preferable than that based on the existence of God - Essay Example

Is Sartre's Existentialist account of morality more preferable than that based on the existence of God Introduction The concept of morality is complex and difficult from many angles. The questions seem to be rhetorical, and over time philosophers and theologians alike have grappled with the purpose, origins and even the very definition of morality. According to the Webster's II New Riverside Dictionary (1984), morality is defined as 'The quality of being virtuous.' The definition of virtue in the same dictionary is 'Moral excellence.' In order to grasp the core arguments of morality and virtue, we must first understand why they are so difficult to define for all of humanity, since so many different philosophies and religions exist today. Here we address the similar but different existential philosophies that address morality based on the existence of God or not. On the one hand, if God does not exist, then where is the value in morality If God does exist yet humans have free will, then what is the origin of morality Due to the evidence of every culture in antiquity believing in some sort of divinity as well as an afterlife, it is critical that we examine the need of such things. This essay will explore different views of existential philosophers in support of or repudiation to Sartre's existential account of morality. We must also bear in mind the political/theological atmosphere surrounding all of these thinkers, which propelled them to pen their thoughts for consideration by the intellectual community. The Pros and Cons Of Theories Of Morality Which Include God Herein lies the division between philosophy and theology; many times it seems that there is no division, simply an attempt to apply reason to religion, as it were. The very basis of philosophy is the search for Truth, and philosophers in general agree that no one owns Truth. The origins of philosophy were based around the conduct of humanity, based upon logic, ethics and emotion, with or without a God. While the philosophers of antiquity such as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle addressed these three key components of philosophy whilst having been related to each other in terms of being each other's students, they managed to accommodate their contemporary theology in their views and ideas. In addition, the same disdain of politicians existed in their works, just as modern times. As philosophy progressed, politics of the day encroached more and more, taking on a more insistent voice in the musings of the philosophers. From Marxism to Existentialism in its truest sense, ideals of conduct were set forth with a plethora of reasons to engage in such conduct. In contrast to Sartre's assertions of morality having no intrinsic value other than humans being the sum of their parts, we look to the work of Karl Jasper, who cuts through the unnecessary conflict of whether or not there is a God and addresses the issue of transcendence being a process of individual maturation, which may lead to the discovery of the One in the Many. Jaspers was considered to be an anti-fascist; his premise took self-realisation into account with existentialism. The freedom of this style is that it gives the mind something to work toward in this one corporeal life; the betterment of oneself and therefore the discovery of interdependence, which may or may not lead to an epiphany regarding a supreme being. That Jaspers indicates something transcendent is indicative of the possibility of a God or higher being, or even a finer level of consciousness that is able to hold its morals and ethics in the face of life's daily pressures and trends, emerging triumphant from the blindness of the masses. While not advocating the existence of God, Jasper's work encourages morality without the need to negate God completely. In Jasper's own words, 'The philosopher lives, as it were, in a hidden, non-objective community to which every philosophising person secretly longs to be admitted. Philosophy has no institutional reality and is not in competition with the church, the state, the real communities of the world. Any objectification, whether it be the formation of schools or sects, is the ruin of philosophy' (Karl Jaspers, 1941, 'On My Philosophy,' excerpted from Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre, ed. Walter Kaufman, found online at: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/jaspers.htm). Works such as Jaspers' indicates a healthy perspective regarding philosophy and its relationship to theology. To him one should enhance the other, not destroy it or glorify it. This is balanced thinking. On the other hand we have the view of a culturally predetermined mind-set of secular thinking when expounding upon existentialism, automatically making such philosophy biased, as Nietzsche so eloquently phrased his argument: 'Inasmuch as at all times, as long as there have been human beings, there have also been herds of men (clans, communities, tribes, peoples, states, churches) and always a great many people who obeyed, compared with the small number of those commanding-considering, then, that nothing has been exercised and cultivated better and longer among men so far than obedience-it may fairly be assumed that the need for it is now innate in the average man, as a kind of formal conscience that commands: "thou shalt unconditionally do something, unconditionally not do something else," in short, "thou shalt." This need seeks to satisfy itself and to fill its form with some content' (Friedrich Nietzche, 1886, Beyond Good & Evil, p. 199). From this statement alone it is easy to recognize the danger of attempting philosophical thinking in its altruistic form when immersed in a society that is 'herd-bound' to a religion. Such premises will not have appeal to agnostic thinkers, atheists, or even members of organized religion who seek a different perspective. The lack of balance implicit in morality theories that include God from within a secular perspective can be locked into a limited mind-set, which does not allow for truly independent thinking and the ability to expand beyond that of the concept of God as put forth by mankind. The Pros and Cons Of Sartre's Theory Of Morality Excluding God The positive aspect of Sartre and his proponents is the factor of personal accountability. By thinking independently of a God with rules and human values and mores, one can form one's own concept of responsibility within the framework of culture and community. To realize one's own potential sans giving credit to or drawing power from a supreme being indicates the ultimate freedom. Unfortunately, the mainstream mind is afraid of this type of freedom, which is why Sartre and his contemporaries suffered much protest and criticism in a time period when communism was gaining ground and the religious and political circles were widening their grasps in the world. This style of philosophy suggests that man gives everything meaning, including himself. The human mind is capable of great imagination and creativity, and in possessing such qualities it is capable of fooling itself into believing in something else being in control. To be free of the constraints of dogma of any kind is the ultimate freedom, yet what does one do with that freedom Does it create a sense of well-being or anarchy Based upon recent history, the answer would be: both. It is imperative, then, that the individual handle freedom responsibly; God or no God, there are still the consequences of actions and choices. In this, the technological age, where religious and political strive are accelerating to dangerous proportions due to sophisticated weaponry and the rise of extremism, it is critical that we question morality in terms of cooperation rather than antagonism. Bertrand Russell gives a very good argument in terms of morality that excludes God: 'As I said before, I do not think that the real reason why people accept religion has anything to do with argumentation. They accept religion on emotional grounds. One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it' (Bertrand Russell, 1927, Why I Am Not a Christian: An Examination of the God-Idea and Christianity, p.20). The persuasion is that morality based upon religion is emotional rather than rational and a function of true intelligence. This argument is valid in that a truly intelligent person is fully capable of effective morals through the desire of true caring rather than devotion to God or abiding by the rules of the Ten Commandments. On the contrary, the writings of Kant illustrate the temptation to grossly misinterpret existentialism (which would, of course, be triggered by the emotions): 'We cannot think an object save through categories; we cannot know an object so thought save through intuitions corresponding to these concepts. Now all our intuitions are sensible; and this knowledge, in so far as its object is given, is empirical. But empirical knowledge is experience. Consequently, there can be no a priori knowledge, except of objects of possible experience' (Immanuel Kant, 1787, Critique of Pure Reason, Section 2, chapter 27, online etext). Here, Kant delineates the importance of thought (which is unlimited) as compared to knowledge (which is limited). The temptation here would be to react without fully comprehending the essence of existentialism; that the individual contains the meaning of what it thinks, what it deduces, what it observes, remembers and acquires as knowledge. Conclusion Which of the moralists have the most morality Hopefully the preceding arguments will make it difficult to answer that question. On the one hand, either secular or existential groups can adhere to a code of conduct and ethics; Violent and emotional reactions are capabilities of any animal including humans, when threatened (and whether the threat is real or imagined). In our modern era we have seen the casualties of extremist groups whose thinking has been rooted in any of the modalities presented here. Mostly the casualties are emotional as clashing ideologies and philosophies create a storm of debate capable of breaking down into violence. It cannot truly be said that either group or their branches are superior to the other. Yet when intertwined, they make for a powerful persuasion in intelligent living. Resources Himmelwright, Gayle (2003), 'Closet Existentialist: Paul-Michel Foucault's Unexplored Existentialist Leanings,' Gnosis, Vol. VI, No. 1, Concordia University Department of Philosophy |Online journal| available at: http://artsandscience.concordia.ca/philosophy/Gnosis/vol_vii_1/foucault.html [27 September 2005] Houghton Mifflin Company (1984), Webster's II New Riverside Dictionary, Berkley Books, New York. Jaspers, Karl (1941), 'On My Philosophy,' excerpted from Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre, ed. Walter Kaufman, Meridian Publishing Company, 1989, |Online|, available at: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/jaspers.htm [26 September 2005] Kant, Immanuel (1787), 'Critique Of Pure Reason,' trans. Norman Kemp Smith, Section 2, Transcendental Deduction of the Pure Concepts of the Understanding |Online|, available at: http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/kant/reason/ch02.htm#22 [27 September 2005] Nietzsche, Friedrich (1886), 'Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to the Philosophy Of the Future, trans. Walter Kaufmann, Vintage Books, New York, 1989. Maertens, Eppo (2004), 'Conflict, Recognition and the Development of Ethical Life in Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit,' Ergon, University Of South Carolina College Of Arts And Sciences, Philosophy |Online journal|, available at: http://www.cas.sc.edu/phil/ergon/issue2/index.html [27 September 2005] Magrini, J.M. (2002), 'On the Sublime: Longinus, Burke and Kant,' The Carleton UniversityStudent Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 20, No. 1 |Online journal| available at: http://rideau.carleton.ca/philosophy/cusjp/v20/n1/magrini.html [26 September 2005] Michels, Steven (2004, Sacred Heart University), 'Nietzsche and the Religion of the Future,' Animus, Vol. 9 |Online journal|, available at: http://www.swgc.mun.ca/animus/current/michels.htm [27 September 2005] McLemee, Scott (21 November, 1993), 'Sartre Redux: A new generation of scholars explores the philosophy and politics of the founder of existentialism,' Chronicle Of Higher Education |Online|, available at: http://chronicle.com/free/v50/i13/13a01001.htm [27 September 2005] Russell, Bertrand Arthur (1927), 'Why I Am Not a Christian: An Examination of the God-Idea and Christianity,' ed. E. Haldeman-Julius, The Little Blue Book, Haldeman-Julius Publications, Girard, Kansas, U.S.A., 1929. Read More