Philosophers of the past were, in their time, people having regular conversation. Some people wrote about the conversations, some didn’t. Some people studied the art of thinking. Some didn’t. Philosophy today feels like something far away, but it’s not. Things are being discussed today; all of the same topics as were discussed in the past. Perhaps more. Perhaps less. The number doesn’t matter. People may avoid philosophy because the authors of the past used big words and took off on a lot of tangents. I can only imagine the twitter wars that would happen today with the philosophers of yesterday. (Is Twitter still a thing?) They got on soap boxes, gave their opinions, went against the common conceptions of their day and bickered with each other. Their words are hard to decipher sometimes, in a different time and culture. But there is value in the art of philosophy. This article is about a philosophy named existentialism, but sans the fancy word, it’s thinking about what individuals value in life.
Existentialism, in simple language, focuses on freedom at an individual level. It then presumes that each of those individuals is, in turn, responsible for actions taken. It goes deep into our perception of the world and narrows in on the subjective perception of life. Is there an objective level? Not for many existentialists. Other existentialists believe there is/or may be a more objective reality and others seem to just disregard the question as useless. Existentialists suggest that life has no predetermined purpose and that we are each responsible for creating our own meaning and value through taking action. The question to ask here is more “why do a stay here?”; as opposed to “why am I here?” If you are looking for an objective purpose, existentialism will only frustrate you, but if you are looking for a subjective purpose, existentialism opens your mind to questions about why you are living the way you live. With those questions comes the overarching shadow of Can I? and Should I? And a realization that only you can answer the questions you are asking.
One of the main areas of discussion for existentialists has been a subjective view of freedom and responsibility. There is emphasis on individuals having radical freedom, which makes each individual ultimately responsible for their own choices and actions. Existentialists argue that we are not bound by external forces or predetermined roles; instead we create our own meaning and values through our experiences.
Freedom, when viewed radically, can either feel liberating or terrifying. The degree of freedom corresponds to the degree of responsibility for choices made. Full responsibility expands to encompass a responsibility for the impact of those choices on others that share your space. Reconciling these two concepts is a goal of existential thinking.
One way to study/perceive these concepts for ourselves is through studying ethics. If existentialism is asking “Why do I…?” ethics asks “Why should I…?” Below are 3 case studies often used in ethics that reflect the concepts of freedom and responsibility.
- The Trolley Problem: This is a classic thought experiment you may have seen before. It’s basically this: a runaway trolley is heading toward 5 people tied to the track. There is a lever that will divert the trolley and you have full freedom to pull it. Do you pull the lever? Let’s go with yes, of course I would. Then the story changes slightly. Now there are 5 people that will be hit if you do not pull the lever. But there is one person who you will hit if you do pull it. Same choice–pull the lever or don’t. New outcome. Now people that have studied this question in the past generally still say they will pull the lever. Because saving five people would be better than just one, on the information provided. Now any good philosopher will start adding detail. What if the one person is your child? Your Mother? Your boss? There is no “right” answer, of course. But how do we go about defining “right” vs. “wrong” anyway? This thought exercise takes you through possible outcomes to a choice made, but it also shows that the freedom to push that button is also a heavy responsibility.
- Whistle-blower: Consider a case of a person who discovers something illegal or unethical in their company. They have the freedom to report what they have witnessed, but that freedom comes with risks to both their personal and professional lives. There are many examples of this online. Study of these cases allows exploration of the responsibility to act ethically, even when it challenges individual well-being.
- Civil Disobedience: Study historical cases of civil disobedience, such as Mahatma Gandhi’s nonviolent protests. His story is a powerful one. On the freedom of individuals and the consequence of invoking that freedom. Study of these thought leaders and how they chose to use their freedom, allows you to explore the tension between individual freedom and the responsibility to challenge unjust treatment or threats to that freedom.
So, all these words…why explore these thoughts at all? In my opinion, these questions make me feel like a more active participant in my daily experiences. There is power in connecting to a subjective purpose that you have identified, vetted and accepted as a personal truth. So if there is a random lever in your life and someone asks you to pull it, having done the work to understand yourself you can make the choice that is right to you.