Naturalness of Morality in Relation to Existentialistic Positions - Term Paper Example

Living Life Meaningfully Understanding the Naturalness of Morality in Relation to Existentialistic Positions Year Level, Section Academic – Professor Date of Submission Defining the Meaningful Life What does it mean to live meaningfully? Is a meaningful life similar to a happy life? If so, what is a happy life? These questions are difficult to answer not because they are conceptually ambiguous, but primarily because there are various perspectives from which we can draw our answers. A meaningful life, as claimed by numerous scholarly articles and self-help books, can be viewed in four facets: professional, personal, social, and spiritual. In this regard, for one’s life to be deemed meaningful, not only must the person be professionally satisfied, he must also be personally mature, socially relatable, and spiritually complete. With this, it can be claimed that meaningfulness is often defined in relation to an ideal figure or state. While this may not necessarily imply that the ways to a meaningful life should be similar to all people, it highlights the fact that its primary characteristics should be. Thus, more often than not, we use certain standards to evaluate a person’s life. In our evaluation, however, we do not consider the four facets equally. Typically, we rank the facets this way, from most important to least important: spiritual, personal, social, and professional. Thus, it is our idea of morality that usually influences our judgment of a meaningful life. Simply put, to live a meaningful life is to live a moral life. Morality, loosely defined, is the practice of good habits, freely and knowingly. Indeed, for a person to be moral, not only must he know the conceptual differences between good and evil, he must also wholeheartedly do good acts. Through this example, we can see the interrelated roles of knowledge and freedom in the formation of good character in a person. With this, it is the formation of good character that is regarded to be the concrete manifestation of a meaningful life. It is in the acquisition of virtues, which is a result of having done wise decisions in life, that makes a person truly happy. While we all agree that it is natural for us to choose to do the good, understanding why and how we do so is hard. Thus, it is in the intention we possess and the quality of good acts we do that ultimately define our character. And this is where the big issue starts. In this essay, we aim to shed light on the nature of a meaningful life (in the context of moral life) by looking at theistic and existentialistic positions. As for the existentialistic positions, we examine the teachings of Sartre and Kierkegaard. In the end, we intend to prove that morality can be accessed and practiced naturally, which may not be aided by theological beliefs. Morality: Theistic and Existentialistic Positions Theistic Position The central position of theists as regards morality starts with its strict definition. To them, morality involves the practice of good acts which remain stable regardless of societal circumstances. For example, no matter how society regards it, lying and killing another person are and will always be inherently evil acts. Now, for us to discern the good acts from the evil ones, we need to submit to an absolute standard of morality. This, as theists deem, is God. Since it is in the nature of God to be all-loving, it is only Him that can guide us in both knowing and doing good acts. God’s guidance to humanity is observed in the Ten Commandments. However, it is crucial to note that the fulfillment of morality does not only rely on knowing what moral acts are, but on knowing what such acts are for. Indeed, the idea of authentic intention is reinforced in a sense that we must do good acts for the love of God. With this mindset, everything is possible, even in loving our enemies. In the end, theists believe that it is through this intention that we are able to build a human civilization that is founded on life and love. This, as they further stated, is in line with our human nature that is intended to achieve perfection both in the physical and in the supernatural realms. Existentialistic Positions On the contrary, it is the belief that human nature exists and the submission to an absolute moral standard that Jean Paul Sartre strongly contradicts. To him, morality is natural in a sense that it can be accessed and practiced without needing the intervention of a supreme being. Morality, to him, is a sole product and responsibility of man. To understand Sartre’s existentialistic position, we have to begin by highlighting on his two primary theses, as stated in Paul Vincent Spade’s Jean Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness: first, that there is no human essence, and second, that existence precedes our essence. As noted in Glyn Hughes’ Existentialism is a Humanism: Squashed Version, unlike beings-in-themselves that possess a concrete purpose (e.g. a paper cutter which is meant solely for cutting paper), we, as beings-for-ourselves, do not have a greater purpose nor a pre-determined plan, since we are ultimately nothing. Building further on this idea, it can be said that we are nothing else but what we make ourselves. Since we have our subjectivity and freedom, we are ultimately responsible for our existence. Indeed, it is the choices that we make in our lives that define who we are as persons. As stated in Existentialism is a Humanism: Squashed Version, “Man is nothing else than his plan; he exists only to the extent that he fulfills himself; he is therefore nothing else than the ensemble of his acts, nothing else than his life.” In addition to this, the idea of forlornness is also discussed in a sense that we have to face the consequences of a Godless life. This is a significant assertion as it clearly implies the absence of any absolute moral standards, and the supremacy of the deciding self. Since there are no a priori principles, what matters in life are not the ideals but the actions we do. This notion of responsibility, however, is focused not only on ourselves but on the entire humanity as well. Thus, Sartre’s existentialism does not promote anarchy but actually advocates universal unity. If there are no natural laws or God’s Commandments to cling to, how can we assure ourselves that we make the good decisions in life? The answer to this question can be found on Soren Kierkegaard’s teachings on the contemplative life and pivotal role of anguish in the discovery of moral actions (although contrary to Sartre who was an atheist, Kierkegaard died a theist). To begin, let us revisit Kierkegaard’s critiques on modern day living in The Present Age. As claimed by Steven Kreis in his online article entitled Soren Kierkegaard, The Modern Age, we have entered into a world of mindless pursuit of material perfection. Although emphasizing on the fulfillment of our physical needs may not be evil in itself, the case is surely different by the time we begin to disregard other essential things in our lives, such as the upholding of ethical living and the fostering of love. To Kierkegaard, such scenario is a manifestation of our myopic understanding of human life. In order to rediscover the true meaning of living, Kierkegaard suggests that we should live a contemplative life. To him, a contemplative life is that which is marked by inwardness or self-reflection. In this light, it is only through meditation that we are able to go deeper in ourselves, which will eventually lead us to confronting our problems and making wiser decisions in life. Living a contemplative life is often triggered by an internal feeling called anguish. To Kierkegaard, anguish is unfocused fear. Faced with a problem, we experience anguish, or the emotionally intense thought that we can either solve or mess up this problem. The idea of choice in this context clearly underlines our freedom. With this, Anthony Storm, in his online essay called On the Concept of Anxiety, opined that anxiety informs us of our choices, and ultimately our personal responsibility in undertaking actions to solve our problems. Thus, we become truly aware of our potential through the experience of anxiety—a realization of our true identity and our freedom as persons. At this point, it is important to note that Kierkegaard’s view of anxiety, although essential in the reinforcement of Sartre’s existentialist notion of living, is entirely taken from his theistic background. Therefore, anxiety is a consequence of our hereditary sin. As noted by Kave Kragen in his online article entitled Soren Kierkegaard and Christian Faith: the Epistemology of the Absurd, it is anguish that led to Adam’s falling into sin. Specifically, it is his understanding of the presence of choice in either following God or abandoning his order that led him to acquire a better view of himself as a free being. Naturalness of Morality: Conclusion Through a concise exploration of the teachings of Sartre and Kierkegaard on the necessity of living a moral life, it can be claimed that morality can be accessed and practiced without submitting to a theological concept of an absolute moral standard, which is God. To begin, Sartre’s existentialism not only focuses on the sole responsibility of man over his life, but on the proper understanding of the concepts of good and evil through the practical encounters with other persons. It is experience, and not mere ideas, that teach man the significance of living a moral life. Through his daily interface with other people, he is able to learn the concept of dignity and respect—that just like himself, other people are free beings who intend to fulfill their plans in life through the choices they make. Although discerning the authenticity of the right actions becomes tricky with the absence of an absolute standard, it is crucial to note that there are ways through which such realization can transpire. Specifically, it is through our contemplation after various encounters with life, as advocated by Kierkegaard, that teach us about the true power of freedom in not only bettering the state of our lives, but the state of humanity in general. The acquisition of knowledge is definitely stronger since we do not need to read literary texts to better grasp the concepts of morality since it is our own experiences that teach us that. Goodness, therefore, is not restricted to those who believe in an all loving-being since the capacity to love is a natural manifestation of our freedom as persons. The existence or the non-existence of God, therefore, does not directly intervene with living a moral life since the quality of the choices we make, although a product of a lot of familial, societal, and cultural circumstances, is and will always be our sole and personal decision. List of References “Existentialism is a Humanism: Squashed Version”. Btinternet.com. Glyn Hughes, 2011. Web. 27 March 2012. “Jean Paul Sartre’s Being and Nothingness”. Pvspade.com. Paul Vincent Spade, 1996. Web. 27 March 2012. “Soren Kierkegaard, The Present Age”. Historyguide.org. Steven Kreis, 2004. Web. 27 March 2012. “On the Concept of Anxiety”. Sorenkierkegaard.org. Anthony Storm, 2011. Web. 27 March 2012. “Soren Kierkegaard and Christian Faith: the Epistemology of the Absurd”. Kave Kragen, 2005. Web. 27 March 2012. Read More