Existence 2

1. Existence 2 Week 09

2. In today’s lecture… • Recap • Kierkegaard (齊克果) – ‘passion of faith’ (全情投入的信仰) • Nietzsche (尼釆) – ‘God is dead’ (上帝已死) • Sartre (沙特) – ‘existence precedes essence’ (存在先於本質) • Camus (卡繆) – ‘absurdity’ (荒謬)

3. Control • In the film Control, Lee Ray Oliver was in the ‘control group’ (對照組), not the ‘experimental group’. The ‘drug’ that he was taking was actually a ‘placebo’ (安慰劑) sugar pills that look like the real drug). • The ‘placebo effect’ (安慰劑效應) is the beneficial effect in a patient following a particular treatment (治療) that arises from the patient’s expectations concerning the treatment rather than the treatment itself.

4. Control To what extent was Lee Ray in control of his own life? Was he acting on his own free will? Do we have free will if our behavior can be completely controlled and changed by chemicals (化學藥物)?

5. What is existentialism? • Existentialism is a school of thought or movement in continental philosophy (歐陸哲學) that focuses on questions about the meaning of life. The emphasis is on issues that have personal significance rather than theoretical knowledge or objective truth. • Existentialist thinkers reject the mechanistic worldview and causal explanations of human action.

6. What is existentialism? • Existentialists explain what it means to be ‘human’ by drawing attention to the difference between human beings and other living or non-living things. • Existentialism highlights (強調) the significance of individuality (個性), subjectivity (主觀性), freedom (free will), responsibility and commitment (承諾、投入感) – i.e. characteristics of being human.

7. What is existentialism? • From the standpoint of existentialism, the world (or universe) itself is meaningless, and therefore there is no objective answers to questions concerning the meaning of life. • However, we humans have the unique capacity to make our lives meaningful through our actions and the free choices we make.

8. What is existentialism? • Existentialism is a person-centered philosophy. Instead of formulating universal ethical principles (普遍的道德律), existentialists emphasize the significance of individual choice in concrete (具體的) situations. • Authentic (真實的) existence is a matter of free choice and self-determination (自決) – individuals create their own identities through their actions and decisions.

9. Think! What is the meaning of life? Can we find an objective answer to this question? When you need to make important choices and decisions, do you seek advice from other people?Do you really think that other people can make choices and decisions for you?

10. Kierkegaard Danish philosopher and religious thinker Søren Kierkegaard 齊克果 / 祈克果 / 克爾凱郭爾 (1813-1855)is often regarded as the ‘father of existentialism’.

11. Kierkegaard • In Kierkegaard’s view, we cannot look at our own lives from a third person point of view. Only by becoming passionate (全情投入) can we realize the meaning of life. • Passion (熱情、熱中) and faith are important ideas in Kierkegaard’s philosophy. For Kierkegaard, faith cannot be based on objective evidence; it is entirely a matter of subjective choice.

12. Kierkegaard • Kierkegaard made philosophy personal: questions about faith and the meaning of life have to be answered in loneliness and isolation (隔離). • It is passionate commitment (投入) that gives ultimate meaning to one’s life. Authenticity (真實) is a matter of taking one’s life seriously as an individual, i.e. to become passionate by committing oneself to something that is personallymeaningful.

13. Kierkegaard • For Kierkegaard, what is crucial (關鍵的) to faith is not the ‘objective truth’ about what one believes, but rather the intensity (強度) of one’s commitment, or what might be called ‘subjective truth’. • In other words, faith is not an objective or intellectual (理性思考的) decision but requires passionate commitment of the individual – i.e. the ‘passion of faith’.

14. Kierkegaard • In other words, to have faith is to believe in something withoutthe support of reason and evidence. If we choose faith we must suspend (暫停、中止) our reason in order to believe in something higher than reason. • Authenticity, therefore, is a matter of how strongly we believe rather than what we believe – the most important thing is the intensity or sincerity (誠意) of our commitment.

15. Kierkegaard • Our ways of life and ways of thinking are often shaped (被影響、被引導) by society or other people, or what Kierkegaard calls ‘the crowd’. As such, we often lose our individuality (個性). • Kierkegaard’s person-centered philosophy, on the other hand, focuses on ‘the single individual’ by looking at things from the subjective or first person point of view.

16. Kierkegaard • Our social life is ‘inauthentic’ (不真實的) in Kierkegaard’s eyes because following the crowd is an act of conformity (服從), i.e. a denial (否認) of our individuality. • The concept of ‘the singleindividual’ for Kierkegaard is contrasted with the concept of ‘the crowd’. Most people are afraid of being alone, so they give up their individuality by conforming to social norms (社會常規) or peer pressure (群眾壓力).

17. Kierkegaard • The ‘crowd’ can be seen as public opinion or ideas that we take for granted (習以為常的), i.e. the ordinary and accepted way of doing things. • We often do those things that everyone else does because we want to behave in a way that satisfies the expectations of a group. In doing so, we show anunwillingness (不願意) to shoulder (承擔) the burden (重負) of being ourselves.

18. Kierkegaard • In Kierkegaard’s view, Christianity as a group religion is inauthentic and therefore must be rejected. For Kierkegaard, Christianity should be viewed as a personal choice based on faith or passionate commitment. • According to Kierkegaard, church commandments (指令) should not be taken asguidance (指引) to matters ofindividual choice.

19. Kierkegaard • In other words, the church’s dogma (教條) is completely meaningless, and we cannot rely on the clergy (神職人員) to tell us what we should do or how we should live our lives. • Faith is meaningful only when it is seen as a matter of individual choice and passionate commitment. This is the only way a person can transform himself, get close to God, and live authentically.

20. Kierkegaard Many people go to church because they enjoy the company of others. They see it as a form of social gathering. Do you agree with Kierkegaard that such an attitude is ‘inauthentic’? Is faith a matter of personal choice as Kierkegaard suggests?

21. Kierkegaard • The example that Kierkegaard uses to illustrate his idea of faith as a passionate personal commitmentis the story of Abraham (亞伯拉罕) in the Book of Genesis (創世紀). • Abraham was told by God to sacrifice (犧牲、祭獻) his son Isaac. Just as Abraham was about to kill Isaac, an angel stopped Abraham from doing so.

22. Kierkegaard • Abraham’s only justification (理由) to kill his own son is what Kierkegaard calls the ‘passion of faith’. Abraham could not have made his decision on the basis of objective arguments or universal ethical principles. • God’s command (命令) could not be seen as a law that would pertain to (適用於) all people; it addressed Abraham as an individual.

23. Kierkegaard • Abraham chose to follow God’s command simply because of his unconditional (無條件的) faith in God, i.e. his firm belief or conviction (信念) that he was doing God’s will (神的意旨). • Abraham was alone before God when he made his choice. By making the decision to sacrifice his son, Abraham had passed the test of unconditional faith in God.

24. Kierkegaard What does the example of Abraham tell us about the nature of ‘faith’? Do you agree with Kierkegaard’s view that faith is nothing else than a passionate commitment? Do you think faith alone can provide answers to questions about the meaning of life? Why or why not?

25. Nietzsche The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche 尼釆 (1844-1900) argued that God was dead. He aimed in all his work to provide a new meaning for human existence in a meaningless world without God.

26. Nietzsche • Both Kierkegaard and Nietzsche lived in a time when Christianity was losing its power and influence. • By the nineteenth century, it became clear to many people that the church and priests (教士) could not provide answers to questions about the meaning and purpose of human existence anymore.

27. Nietzsche • The nineteenth century was a time of spiritual crisis (精神危機、信仰危機).The Church was unable to respond to changes such as industrialization, urbanization and the rise of modern mass society. • In particular, the church’s teachings had been undermined (被削弱) by the mechanistic worldview. The traditional idea of a Christian God could no longer serve as thebasis of morality.

28. Nietzsche • Kierkegaard thinks thatChristian faith should be seen as completely ‘personal’ – the belief in God must be an individual choice that has nothing to do with church commandments or activities of religious groups. • Nietzsche, on the other hand, argues that Christian values are outdated and Christian morality has lost its relevance in the modern world.

29. Nietzsche • According to Nietzsche, religion gives comfort (慰藉) to people who do not have the courage (勇氣) to live without spiritual (精神的) support. • Nietzsche suggeststhat the belief in an all-powerful God is a sign of weakness. Christians were attached (依附) to Christianity in order to compensate (補償) for their individual weaknesses.

30. Nietzsche • Nietzscheviews religion as the product of people’s ‘herd instinct’ (羊群本能). Ordinary people are like herd animals that have trained themselves to conform to religious and moral values. • In particular, Nietzsche sees Christianity as a ‘slave morality’ (奴隸的道德), i.e. a means (工具) by which the weak protect themselves from the strong.

31. Nietzsche • The weak stresses (強調) Christian virtues (品德) such as love, kindness and charity. In Nietzsche’s view, these values have nothing to do with individual excellence, power or creativity (創造力). • Christianity alsoemphasizes equality and conformity (服從). As a ‘slave morality’, it denounces (否定) our natural instincts (自然本能) and suffocates (扼殺) our creative potential.

32. Nietzsche • Nietzsche draws attention to ‘the death of God’, i.e. the collapse (崩潰) of Christianity in the modern age. • God, for Nietzsche,represents the source of Christian morality.The secularization (世俗化) of European society in modern times has led tothe death of God, who has served as the basis for meaning and value in the West for more than a thousand years.

33. Nietzsche • For Nietzsche, the death of God means that people’s lives no longer have an ultimate (終極的) meaning and purpose. For most of them, the psychological effect of God’s absence is a sense of emptiness and despair (失望、失落). • The result is ‘nihilism’ 虛無主義(i.e. a lack of meaning, value and purpose in life) .

34. Nietzsche • Nietzsche is particularly interested in the psychological (as well as cultural and social) consequences of nihilism. For most people, life becomes meaningless as they lose faith in God. • A strong or creative individual, however, will see nihilism as an opportunity to revaluate (重估) all existing values. Nietzsche imagines such a person as the ‘overman’超人 (Übermensch).

35. Nietzsche • Life for most people is meaningless because they do not understand that the only way to make sense of their existence is to create meaning and value in an otherwise meaningless world. • The overman, in contrast, would be able to use his superhuman will power (意志力) and creativity to overcome nihilism by creating new values and establishing new meaning for existence.

36. Nietzsche Is Christianity is a form of ‘slave morality’? Do you agree with Nietzsche’s view that believing in God is a sign of weakness? Do you think that religion is meaningful only insofar as it provides psychological comfort (心理上的慰藉) to people?

37. Read! Go to the course website, download and read a short article titled ‘Kierkegaard and Nietzsche’.

38. Sartre Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was an influential French writer, thinker and social activist. He is the best-known exponent of existentialism.

39. Sartre • Among the major thinkers, Sartre is the only one who calls himself an existentialist. For him the central idea of existentialism is the idea that ‘existence precedes essence’ (存在先於本質). • For Sartre, there is no God and therefore no fixed or predetermined (既定的) human nature. The only fact that really matters is that we exist, and our ‘essence’ is determined by our choices and actions.

40. Sartre • The ‘essence’ (本質) of an object, or its essential properties(必要的特質), are those properties which make it the kind of thing it is. • For example, aknife is made for a particular purpose, i.e. cutting. That is what makes it a knife. Because the idea of the knife comes before it is manufactured, we can say that its essence precedes (先於) its existence.

41. Sartre • In some religions, God is seen as the creator of humans. God had in mind the idea of humans before He created us. If that was the case, then we would be similar to manufactured objects in the sense that our essence would precede our existence. • Sartre is an atheist (無神論者). He denies (否定) that God exists; so, in his view, we humansdo not have a pre-given (既定的) essence laid out for us by God.

42. Sartre • Unlike other objects (e.g. a knife), whose essential properties are fixed by the kind of things they are, human beings have no ‘essence’. • What is essential to human beings — what makes us who we are — is not fixed or determined. Man, in Sartre’s view, is totally free and entirely responsible for what he makes of himself.

43. Sartre • We first simply ‘exist’. We become who we are through the actions we take and the choices we make. Thus, we establish our own identity and essence by creating our own meanings and values in a world without meaning. • In Sartre’s words: ‘Man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world – and defines himself afterwards.’

44. Sartre • Unlike inanimate objects, we humans have no fixed essence and are always free to create our own identities. Existence precedes essence: What we are (our essence) is the result of our choices –we are what we make ourselves to be. • We have no predetermined essence. We just exist. We create our own identities through the choices we make and the actions we take.

45. Sartre Sartre’s view of human existence can be summarize as follows: • We are born into a world not of our own making (and not of our own choosing). • Other people cannot tell us how to live our lives. We must make choices for ourselves. • We become who we are through the choices and decisions we make.

46. Sartre • Choice, freedom and responsibility are central ideas of Sartre’s existentialism. For Sartre, to live authentically is to be aware of one’s free choices and take responsibility for their consequences. • All actions imply choices. Even if I do not choose, I have chosen not to choose. Thus, Sartre argues that it is self-deception (自我哄騙) to think that we cannot make free choices.

47. Sartre • When we find ourselves in a situation in which we have to make a choice, we are facing an open range of possible actions. • Even at times when we have little or no control over external circumstances, we still have choice and freedom from a subjective standpoint because, according to Sartre, it is our free consciousness that gives meaning to the situation.

48. Sartre • For example, if you have had some unhappy experiences as a child, it is up to you to decide what those experiences mean to you. You can use them as an excuse to blame other people for your misfortune(不幸), or you can regard them as challenges that will make you stronger. • Sartre goes so far as to say that a prisoner (囚犯) or a person undergoing torture (被拷問、受折磨的人) remains free.

49. Sartre • By interpreting (解釋) the situation in a particular way, we are, in fact, making a choice. We are free in the sense thatwe have the power to give meaning to the situation. • No matter what the situation is, we can always reflect on (反省) it, decide what it means for us, and then make our own choice.

50. Sartre • According to Sartre, we have total freedom of choice. No one else can make decisions for us or tell us what we should do. • However, most people are unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions, so they shy away from (逃避) making choices for themselves. They are afraid of the freedom of choice and the responsibility of self-determination (自決).