Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The concept of identity
The concept of identity
The concept of identity
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The concept of identity
Philosophers Jean-Paul Sartre and Martin Buber both emphasize how the presence of others in our lives and the bonds which we create with them define who we are and affects our self-perception. Both have their own theory of how this occurs. I will begin by discussing Sartre’s perspective on the subject, and Buber’s stance will follow. First, we will learn what Sartre’s “Bad Faith and Falsehood” teaches us. Sartre defines “consciousness” as a being conscious of its nothingness. He explains that humans start from zero (birth), and that the actions taken throughout our development take us from being nothing to being something. Humans have the capacity to deny themselves, we tend to negate what we are and to aspire for what we have yet to become. Close attention has to be given to the term of “bad faith”, since it can result to be highly deceitful. Before going into bad faith we should have clear idea of what “falsity” and “falsehood” mean. Falsity describes all forms of consciously lying. In other words, when a person is aware of the truth but expresses a contradicting thought. Falsehood, on the other hand, is a neutral lie committed out of ignorance. It can be considered an unintentional lie, since the person has to be fully aware of the truth in order to lie. These two forms of lying are what Sarte distinguishes as “lying in general”. Now that we have a better idea of what falsity and falsehood are, let’s approach the idea of what it consists to be in bad faith. Starting off with a concrete example of bad faith will help visualize its connotation in a more effective way. An upcoming freshman, who has struggled fitting in with his peers in the past, enters a new high school where he has no acquaintances. This individual... ... middle of paper ... ...re able to meet ourselves; thus finding meaning in life. Therefore, we can conclude that what is meaningful can only be acquired through what is real. Connection to an object is not real connection at all. We can only have connection with another being. It is only in this connection where a true sharing of our essence is possible. An individual who remains in the I-It experience, will never fully develop his own person and his life will never attain a true meaning. However, this relationship with the one another is not found by searching for it, rather it happens by chance. The problem is that by seeking it we are susceptible to a predisposition similar to the way we desire an object converting it to an I-It relationship. We find the Thou by allowing it to occur freely, in this way there are no assumptions or expectations and a real connection can be made.
It is crucial that every belief must be thoroughly explored and justified to avoid any future repercussions. Clifford provides two examples in which, regardless of the outcome, the party that creates a belief without comprehensive justification ends up at fault. It is possible to apply the situations in The Ethics of Belief to any cases of belief and end up with the conclusion that justification is of utmost importance. Justifying beliefs is so important because even the smallest beliefs affect others in the community, add to the global belief system, and alter the believer moral compass in future decisions.
Many people struggle to properly defend their faith when confronted about it and even waver in their faith when presented with doubts against their faith that sound convincing. This is because many do not move beyond a basic understanding of their faith and fail to learn the fundamentals of Christian faith. The book Truth Matters: Confident Faith in a Confusing World by Andreas Köstenberger and the film God’s Not Dead (Harold Cronk, 2014) present both similar and different viewpoints on defending one’s faith adequately. Arguments addressed by both the book and the film include the credibility of people, a concept of morals, and the existence of evil.
Bad faith is pretending that we are not free and responsible for what we are and do, when in fact we know that we are. It is also pretending that we are causally determined as inanimate things are, and that therefore we have no freedom and are not responsible for our lives, as victims of circumstances. To have a truly authentic existence, Sartre dictates that we live according to our own beliefs, that we insert meaning into the acts that we do, not finding meaning from what other people say. We should no live in regard to what other people think or say, because this would also push us into bad faith.
With such great minds and an awesome influence that seems boundless, how can there not be references to the works of Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant. The Fundamental Principles in the Metaphysics of Morality is used by the minority dissenting opinion to reiterate the concepts of the intrinsic dignity of man. While the majority uses the literary work the Leviathan to support their own opinions. Transforming and uplifting the case of Gregg v. Georgia into an arena for a debate of Hobbian and Kant philosophies.
The philosophy of Tae Kwon Do is to build a more peaceful world. To accomplish this goal Tae Kwon Do begins with the foundation, the individual. The Art strives to develop the character, personality, and positive moral and ethical traits in each practitioner. It is upon this "foundation" of individuals possessing positive attitudes and characteristics that the "end goal" may be achieved.
While Buber claims that we conceive the world through the Other, Sartre argues that we come to view ourselves through the Other.
The relationship you have with others often has a direct effect on the basis of your very own personal identity. In the essay "On The Rainy River," the author Tim O'Brien tells about his experiences and how his relationship with a single person had effected his life so dramatically. It is hard for anyone to rely fully on their own personal experiences when there are so many other people out there with different experiences of their own. Sometimes it take the experiences and knowledge of others to help you learn and build from them to help form your own personal identity. In the essay, O'Brien speaks about his experiences with a man by the name of Elroy Berdahl, the owner of the fishing lodge that O'Brien stays at while on how journey to find himself. The experiences O'Brien has while there helps him to open his mind and realize what his true personal identity was. It gives you a sense than our own personal identities are built on the relationships we have with others. There are many influence out there such as our family and friends. Sometimes even groups of people such as others of our nationality and religion have a space in building our personal identities.
“ The self's struggle for authenticity and definition will never end unless it's connected to its creator -- to you and to me. And that can happen with awareness -- awareness of the reality of oneness and the projection of self-hood. For a start, we can think about all the times when we do lose ourselves.”
When Sartre says, “We are left alone, without excuse. That is what I mean to say that man is condemned to be free” (Sartre 32), he is speaking of man’s autonomous life; which is human independence and freedom to will one’s actions. Because God, according to Sartre, did not create man we are self-creating. Through human intelligence comes essence, the intrinsic nature or indispensible quality of something, but essence only comes after human existence. Creating ones own essence allows man to be free because we create what we are, rather then our identities being given to us. The only guidance man gets is from themselves because man is left alone in the universe, which in-turn makes man responsible. Man has no one telling him what to do, there may be laws but they are man made and because they man made no one has true control over man.
I will explore the relationship between faith and belief. At first glance, most of us will have the same thought that there is no difference between faith and belief. However, if we carefully examine them in detail, we will recognize their differences. Consider the difference in the meaning of “belief” in the following propositions: “I believe it will rain tomorrow” and “I believe 2+2=4.” Our general purpose is to express our thoughts to others and show them what things we want to believe. Shortly, our belief can be changed depending on our mood or our different cultures. When we’re talking about our faith, we must keep it in constancy. We can not say today our faith is this and tomorrow is on another. Therefore, the difference between faith and belief can be express as: faith is constant, and belief is varied. Faith shows “X-experiences and pre-cu...
In all its forms, American philosophy emphasizes freedom and the supreme importance of the individual. Indeed, an examination of four major American writers shows these concepts in all four main schools of American thought-- Epicureanism, Transcendentalism, Pragmatism, and Protestantism.
Life’s purpose remains as a variable for mankind. There are three possible choices for this variable: no purpose, a purpose, or the purpose. These choices can be analogous to nihilism, existentialism, and belief in a divine being respectively. But how should one live? From a nihilistic viewpoint, an existentialistic perspective, or just in plain faith? The answer: the latter. However, humans tend to believe their thinking is rational, but one can only say one’s thinking is rational if one knows everything. According to Jesús Mosterín, “Humans are not rational by definition but they can think and behave rationally… depending on whether they apply… the thoughts they accept” (Infosources). In the context of these words, humans create what they believe is rational depending on their knowledge, but in actuality humans cannot be rational because they do not possess omnipotence. Since humans are irrational, there must be a being that is rational who knows the explanations to all questions; everything must have an opposite. With this, nihilism and existentialism are creations of the human mind making it irrational; both of these philosophies do not explain the fundaments to our existence. Rather they are merely a replacement for what humans cannot understand. Hence, people should live by faith in a divine being as it is rational whereas both nihilism and existentialism are irrational.
Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children's understanding of deception. Cognition, 13(1), 103-28.
Each person needs to learn to respect, have integrity and be unique in their own way. One will learn that through struggle and a lot of effort to overcome different situations. I think that like me the world needs a balance where some need to be more than others, for example some people need to be kinder in contrast to cruelty to learn from each other to either be a better person or stay the same. This world needs people who are open to accept changes to change themselves and how they live, because for this world to be a more healthy and happy place we need to start changes within our own.
If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one around, a number of people will judge that it made noise, whereas the rest will suggests the possibility of the inexistence of noise, and as a result, the difference in perception of the two groups will suggests the possibility of the statement posing an epistemological problem. According to John Locke, in his analysis on the mode of operation of the human mind, the deduction on the possibility of the existence of noise is dependent on the perception and the understanding of the individual analyzing the situation. Therefore, in order to make an objective conclusion from the analysis of the statement, it is imperative to consider the differences in people’s perception prior to solving the epistemological problem. Consequently, the examination of the classical theories of philosophy is essential in the analysis of the puzzle. This is because there exist differences in human understanding and as such, the differences determine the outcome of the analysis.