All things Philosophical. discussion


Comments Showing 1-11 of 11 (11 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by John (new)

John | 41 comments Of itself no for it is a F of something else- a cognitively developed brain as humans possess !

message 2: by Mark, The Failed Philosopher (new)

Mark Burns (TheFailedPhilosopher) | 167 comments Mod
We have a Dennett? If so, how is Dennett not completely moving the goal posts by making Free Will about moral agency and avoidance choice? Isn't that ignoring the entire point that is still the basic argument that "one can not will what one wills"

message 3: by Mark, The Failed Philosopher (new)

Mark Burns (TheFailedPhilosopher) | 167 comments Mod
I've just noticed why my rambling was not on this's a duplicate thread, lol

message 4: by John (new)

John | 41 comments Sartre's idea of freedom is conditioned by situational aspects that can not be fully explicated and therefore one is not absolutely free- the big one is history that situates us in a milieu not of our choosing!

message 5: by Mark, The Failed Philosopher (new)

Mark Burns (TheFailedPhilosopher) | 167 comments Mod
Actually Sartre's problem freedom was the over impingement of existence caused by everything being superfluous and you being free. The freedom we were condemned to was ultimate freedom of the solitary kind. Free to do everything but having no real reason to do anything. Same limit but the situations being superfluous was kind of the important bit.

message 6: by John (new)

John | 41 comments I agree in Nausea freedom is vacuous for the reasons you stated for a guy like R can only project his dismal self understanding onto a mirror image of himself for the W has no transcendent meaning in itself but only as it appears to a field of poss. choices to a meaning giving self who apart from these choices has no essence/ meaning himself

message 7: by John (new)

John | 41 comments A lack of tradition as given in history or so called primitive cultures undercuts any possibility of transcendence, except as power of Consc. to objectify things thru Lang., science, and religion as exemplified in Western division between sacred and profane, pure and impure, subjective/ objective, etc.

message 8: by John (new)

John | 41 comments Also in his play No Exit -although in reality they are free to leave- and in B&N others are a potential threat to my freedom as being independent agent by being objectified. Sartre's For it self cannot be vacuous since the other is always already there as formative influences in our lives!

message 9: by John (new)

John | 41 comments Reading bk on Sartre's negative reception among academic Phil in U S in 40 thru 60ths due to many factors as lack of English translation of main text B&N and perceived inadequate methodology- phenomenology is mystery to Am. Analytic Phil.

message 10: by John (new)

John | 41 comments To will is not to freely will for the latter reqs. free choice between viable alternatives - my way or the highway is not a real choice for it like being asked do you me to kill you using a gun or an ax- no I rather you not kill me in the first place -now that's a real choice!

message 11: by John (new)

John | 41 comments Why am I here? Because I am not there! Read me carefully Heid. It's all about being here in the first place then I can go there if I so choose! And by the way I was not thrown/ cast rudely into existence I was born into it with according to Freud fishes swimming around me-Oceanic feeling of oneness!

back to top