Existentialism and Relativism and the Diversity Between Individuals - Essay Example

Existentialism vs. Relativism Philosophy Existentialism vs. Relativism Introduction Existentialism has its roots in the 20th century philosophy from the writings of Heidegger, Kierkegaard, Sartre and Camus, and entails an analysis of the way human beings find themselves existing in the world. This is philosophy that is concerned with enabling individuals to find self and attach meaning to life through choice, will and personal responsibility. This philosophy is embarked on the belief that individuals try to attach meaning to their life experiences, on the basis of their outlook, experiences and beliefs. Existentialists believe that personal choices are unique and do not have to be based on an objective form of truth (Waugh, 2004: pp. 432). Relativism serves as the antagonist of absolutism. These are individuals who perceive every situation in life as having two different perspectives and understanding. Relativism personalities believe that the truth or falsity of a concept is relative to the social context from which the idea is generated. Their idea is that what is true for an age group, social class or tribe, might not be true for the same age group, social class and tribe in a different setting. They appreciate that there exists diversity in the norms that are upheld by various societies (McLachlan, 2005: pp. 92). Key Distinctions between Existentialism and Relativism Sartre used existentialism following the World War II as a basis of framing the political and social issues. Camus on the other hand assisted in the popularization of the philosophy, by focusing on personal freedom and individualism. It served as a justification to challenge the regimes at that time and the administrators and citizens embraced the philosophy as a solace to the frustrations they were encountering from domestic and foreign policies between 1960s and 1970s (Waugh, 2004: pp. 432). In contrast, relativism is associated with traditional modernism and is related to false consciousness. Relativism does not believe that the way things appear is the way they are in reality. These individuals believe that any ideas in the subconscious need to be tested through research. It is only through research and knowledge that one is able to tell apart the reality from fallacy. Unlike the existentialists who try to understand the events in their life after happening, the relativists expose the events of other people to research and gain knowledge that depict their future events (McLachlan, 2005: pp. 92). Existentialists believe in human free will. They believe that religion, law, society, and ethics do not indentify an individual. They believe that an individual is able to define himself if he violates the norms set by the society and challenges the preset standards. They believe that an individual is at his best when he is struggling against nature and struggling to maintain his life. They are excited by challenges and find pleasure in going against all the preset rules. Existentialists believe that in doing this, they are able to attach meaning to what they believe in and also attach meaning to their life since they just do not follow rules without understanding them (Waugh, 2004: pp. 432). However, relativists believe that an individual is defined by the society in which he exists. They believe that rules define the norms of a society and set apart what is right from what is wrong. Besides, they acknowledge the fact that different societies have different rules and regulations and hence respect the diversity that exists in individuals. Relativists do not struggle with life and they believe that life flows with nature and the life of others should be used as a specimen not to make the same mistakes. They have the notion that life should be programmed and should not be haphazard in bid to discover oneself (McLachlan, 2005: pp. 92). Relativists believe in having their own way and they do not have the “it is my fault” mentality. They have the rationale that what they are experiencing is better placed than what other people are experiencing. This makes them individuals who uphold honor and believe in having a good life. They also believe that life has room for wealth creation and will go to any lengths to enjoy their life. This is attributed to the notion that they hold that tomorrow is not certain and what happens tomorrow in unpredictable hence to enjoy what life has offered to them for them. Apparently, they do not have it is my fault mentality and believe that others greatly contribute to their misfortunes (Davis, 2008: pp. 270). On the contrary, existentialism with the sole aim of giving meaning to life and its processes, do not consider themselves superior to others. In case of misfortune, they believe that they have got their share of the blame to bear and to have it is my fault mentality. This makes them take it upon themselves to bring change in the society as they always find there is something that can be changed. Though they acknowledge that science is not a solution to their problems, they do not believe in wealth accumulation and honor. They do not have a comfort zone and are always out to challenge and expand their capabilities in dealing with situations. They believe tomorrow will always be there and today is meant to make tomorrow better and not enjoy what today has (West, 2008: p. 15). Existentialists have the notion that some things that happen in life are not rational. An example is that they do not believe that rules made should not be challenged and followed blindly. They believe that decisions are not made without any consequences and stresses. They believe that they should be responsible for the consequences of their actions and hence as stipulated in many uprising situations, majority of them challenge even the leaders who lead them. Though are aiming at change, they end up being very distressed and emotionally unstable individuals as they believe in challenging everything even facts of life (West, 2008: p.15). Relativists however, believe in the rationality of life. They perceive that each event in life in well planned and hence follow the rules set with all the rationale that the rules call for. They are stable individuals who do not hold events emotionally and have no business with trying to outdo the authorities. They do not believe that they society ruins individuals but believes it upholds morality in the society. They believe in the idealistic of life and the promptness of life. This makes them enjoy every moment of life and not view life as a punishment or as a challenge as viewed by existentialists (Davis, 2008: pp.270). Majority of relativists mass opinion holders. They believe that as long as an individual belongs to a certain age group, social class, or society, the treatment accorded to people of his caliber should be the same treatment accorded to him. Individuals are not treated as individuals and their capabilities often go unnoticed since they are perceived to from a larger group. This leads to generalization where individuals are judged on the basis of the society they affiliate with. This consequently limits the innovation of the individual since they are programmed to follow their predecessors. This leads to boredom and conformity to the norm (Davis, 2008: pp. 270). Existentialists believe in autonomy of individuals and perceive individuals as unique. An individual is not generalized from the society he affiliates with as existentialists strive to freedom. They strive to gain freedom from the norm and that is evidenced by their propensity to challenge the institutions that govern them. They believe in surviving in an institution where they are free and are not bound by any rules or regulations. They do not generalize individuals and believe that every individual has a reason to exist in his own world. This leads to their ability to challenge the existing groups and societies. As pertains to religion, existentialists believe that it in not the opium of the masses but rather that every individual presents the religion of his own. This has attributed to the religion conflicts uprising in the United States (Mazarr, 2004: pp.39). Conclusion Existentialists can be described as individuals who are out to exist in their own world and believe that challenges are meant to make them stronger. They perceive the world as a place to thrive as a result of their aggressiveness in their quest to discover themselves. They do not believe that science is the answer to everything and believe that individuals are molded by the challenges they go through. On the contrary, relativists are people who adhere to the norms set by the society and an individual from that society is associated with the society he stems from. They believe that life should be enjoyed as of now and strongly affiliate with their culture leading to generalization. An individual who affiliate with an age group, social class, or society is attributed to belong to that society. However, they uphold that societies are governed by different attributes and hence each society is held differently from the other. Philosophy gives an insight to existentialism and relativism in bid to enable learners to understand and appreciate the diversity between individuals. References Davis, J. E. (2008). Culture and relativism. Society, 45(3), 270-276. doi:10.1007/s12115-008-9080-x Mazarr, M. J. (2004). The psychological sources of Islamic terrorism. Policy Review, (125), 39-60. Retrieved December 15, 2011 from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216447293?accountid=45049 McLachlan, H. V. (2005). Language, truth and meaning: A defense of modernism. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 25(12), 92-113. Retrieved December 15, 2011 from http://search.proquest.com/docview/203761094?accountid=45049 Waugh, W. L,. (2004). The existentialist public administrator. International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 7(3), 432-451. Retrieved December 15, 2011 from http://search.proquest.com/docview/212064427?accountid=45049 West, A. (2008). Sartrean existentialism and ethical decision-making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(1), 15-25. doi:10.1007/s10551-007-9477-2 Read More