Existentialism and its Commonality with Other Beliefs
Dialogs November 10th, 2007Existentialist thought asks “is there any purpose in existence?” We can consider a purpose for existence can come from an external authority or from our own subjective judgment. We can briefly consider polytheism: if there are multiple external authorities, we still have to make a subjective choice between them.
How does an external authority assign its purpose to our existence? Imagine this discussion:
A: You ought to do X. (Note: X is an arbitary action)
B: Why should I do X?
A: Because X is good.
B: How do we know X is good?
A: X is good because authority Z said so. (Note: Z is often called God)
B: Why ought we accept Z as authority?
A: Because Z is good.
B: Saying Z is good and also Z defines good is tautology.
A: Ok, Z is your creator and benefactor. There fore we ought to accept Z.
B: You are going from an “is” statement to an “ought” statement. That is not valid logically.
A: You owe Z your obedience.
B: This implies I should obey because it is “good” action. But what is “good”?
A: You ought to accept Z because it will make you happy.
B: Happiness is not a criterion of truth. (Note: Fancy a shot of morphine?)
A: Your conscience says accept Z.
B: Not a criterion of truth. And people have difference urges of conscience. Therefore conscience is subjective.
A: You need faith in Z.
B: Ah! So you are saying we just believe in Z without proof? How very existential!
So even if there is a God, there is still this question of what is “good”.
All systems of belief have this underlying characteristic. If people ask what is the basis for “ought” statements, but decide to maintain their beliefs, they immediately accept existentialism! If they abandon their beliefs, they become nihilists – which is not what I am advocating.
Interestingly, the Catholic Catechism does hint at the freedom of choosing what is right and wrong – but it is more a choice of two external standards of right and wrong. I need more time to research the proposition that “God is Good”.
1730 God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. “God willed that man should be ‘left in the hand of his own counsel,’ so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.” Catechism of the Catholic Church
After assigning man “control his own actions”, why do they assume we ought to “of his own accord seek his Creator”?
If we have freedom, we have existentialism.
Anti Citizen One
November 10th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
re: Catholicism and free choice.
-Cardinal John Henry Newman stated that the ultimate moral authority that man had to answer too was his own conscience.
-In the encylical Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI which was a letter prohibiting the use of artifical methods of contraception the Pope makes a clear concession to conscience, to paraphrase he says, contraception is wrong, follow your conscience and never forget the church teaches forgiveness. He almost accepts at the beginning the futility of the prohibition he is espousing.
November 10th, 2007 at 2:37 pm
re: the general existentialist question and is Gods will good because God is good, or is it good because God wills it…. this question is dealt with at length by numerous philosophers. In the existentialist sphere Kierkegaard places this as a centrally important paradox in the existentialist condition. He does not seek to resolve the question, and the paradox can only be resolved by the counterintuitive leap of faith.