-
The Doctrine Of Freedom And Responsibility In Jean Paul Sartre - The Fundamental Principles In An Authentic Existence
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 6]
Page 3 of 6
-
-
-
Man by nature is free
some would say; the dictum “man is free†explains all about man and
freedom. Historically, man’s existence is endowed with freedom. So
freedom is as old as man himself. John Locke speaking on freedom says
“men are naturally in a state of perfect freedom, to order their actions
and dispose of their possessions as they think fit…â€7
Though the
notion of freedom is as old as man, it started in time with the ancient
Greek thinkers, but only on moral reflections. They did not delve
directly into the problem of freedom because of three prominent reasons,
which include:-
1. They believe that everything is subjected to
fate and absolute will, superior to men as well as gods, which
indirectly determine every action.
2. Men is part of nature, and
thus, is subject to the general laws that govern everything including
man himself, and as such cannot but obey such laws.
3.
Man is also subject to the influence of history, which the Greek
conceived as a cyclical movement in which everything repeats itself
within a certain period of time. This is not unconnected to the fact
that they were unable to understand human nature and the cosmos exactly.
The above reason led to asking such questions as; are we
truly responsible for our actions? And how imputable are our deeds to
ourselves? The issue of freedom went philosophical when Socrates took it
up. He argued that “virtue is connected with knowledge, but vice is
simply due to ignoranceâ€8. This stand rather than solving the issue of
freedom exonerated man totally from any act of intransigence. Plato
instead of repudiating the stand of Socrates broadened the scope. He
argued that the “body is a kind of prison and the soul is entrenched in
it, but could be liberated through the exercise of virtue and
philosophical contemplationâ€9. The problem of freedom acquired new
dimension and attracted a great interest in the medieval period. Fate
never existed; rather God was seen as the loving father and a provider.
History and nature were placed at the service of man instead of being
above man. During this period, freedom moved to a question of
relationship between man and God.
With regard to the above
assertion, some questions arose as: Why has God created man free knowing
that he would abuse the gift? Thomas Aquinas representing the medieval
thinkers said that, though man is under the authority of God, he has the
freedom to choose his own destiny by free act of the will. Thus, he
writes;
The rational creature governs itself by its intellect and
will, both of which are required to be governed and perfected by the
divine intellect and will. Therefore, above the government whereby the
rational creature governs itself as master of its own act, it requires
to be governed by God10.
In the modern period, freedom took
another conception; The Theo-centric aspect was replaced with
anthropocentricism; man became conscious of his autonomy and thus, the
issue of freedom changed its dimension to human faculties, passion and
man’s relationship with the society. Descartes the father of modern
philosophy has this to say through the immanentic premise of his
philosophy of the Cogito ergo sum: “Freedom is no longer perceived as a
choice of good, but as a choice of pure and simple as the spontaneous
self determination of the individualâ€11. Leibniz says that the principle
of reason causes everything. Hence, “every event must have a cause for
its beingâ€12. Hegel, on his treatise on the mind and body relationship
posited that all is absolute Spirit, and that an “authentic freedom is
not merely individual choice but obedience to the objective reasonâ€13.
Karl Marx substituted Hegel’s absolute Spirit with dialectical
materialism, holding that the idea of individual choice is necessitated
by social value. Kant in his view of ‘existential analytic’- a treatise
on the justification of human existence in relation to freedom argued
that, freedom is neither direct intuition nor logical demonstration, but
a postulation that demands moral law. Thus, Kant defines freedom as
“the property of the will to give to itself a law and to be subordinate
to the law of necessity, as the phenomena areâ€14.
In the contemporary
period, the existentialists appeared on the stage. Freedom
for them is not a property of the will but the very structure of the
being of man.
CHAPTER ONE -- [Total Page(s) 6]
Page 3 of 6
-
