Confucius advocated good government that would promote the well-being of the common people and would bring about the harmonious relationships between all citizens and insisted that we live in a moral world (pg. 11). I agree with him on this. I do believe that the government’s main job is to advocate for safe communities and a nation that strides for healthy relationships. It is an important aspect for any society to develop moral codes of conduct to follow in order to ensure the safety for all. That’s where the government comes in. Organizations such as the police and fire department, the military, the Corporation for National and Community Service, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Equal or the Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) all are in place to protect its citizens and create a sustainable atmosphere where the basic needs of its citizens are meant. Basic needs such as food, clothing, shelter, and a nation that is well-protected are fortunately provided and able to be utilized in most situations. That is why any government aimed at creating a country where an individual person can move up, so to speak, regardless of social class is one that advocates and promotes for the well-being of the common people. We are used this concept in our “great” country and the idea that our individual effort can catapult us to the top. This is the staple of America, fueling its consumption and capitalistic style of thinking in any situation. I believe where one is raised and how they were brought along with the opportunities provided to oneself dictate how they will be able to live the rest of their life (i.e. move up). That is one greatest perks of living in the USA. However, is this possible for all persons? Specifically those in third world countries? Confucius thought that everything that occurs in someone’s life is one’s destiny and fate is predetermined; no personal acts will change one’s fate (pg. 12). I completely agree with him on this statement 100%, something I would have disagreed only a few months ago. Recently I went on a medical mission trip to Nicaragua. Talk about extreme poverty… approximately 65% of the country is unemployed. As you can imagine people living in the worst of the poverty and poorest parts of the country have absolutely nothing. No running water, electricity, medicine, clean water, or sanitation in general. Not to mention there is absolutely no options for a job at all. They live off the land per say. They are fighters and all so happy to be alive and see us. I do not believe they could change their fate? Who am I to suggest what they think a good life is…or the ideas they have of “moving up”? From my perspective I see no feasible way of getting out of many of those peoples’ situations... the absolute poverty most likely due to the ability of not being able to find a job. That’s all they know… dirt roads, dirty water and a dirty governmental system that doesn’t promote the well-being of the common good for all people. Government seemed be much less prominent there and there are no agencies that help the citizens of that truly beautiful nation. The help just didn’t exist and that is a direct connection between limited resources and a blind eye turned by the guys at the top. Overall the experience was eye opening and humbling. It was quite sad but refreshing to see smiles and hugs from all of the little children, who were very eager to climb all over me. It was a great experience.
Another aspect Confucius touches on is that we know nothing about heaven (pg.12) In Analects, specifically the Diagnosis section, Confucius outlines five sins or downfalls of human nature (pg.14): People are attached to profit, society lacks the respect of filial piety meaning respect for one's father, elders, and ancestors, the connection between word and action cannot be trusted, ignorance regarding the Way of the sages prevails, and lastly benevolence is absent from human affairs. I agree with Confucius on these principles and where man lacks self-discipline. Human existence is based on self-discipline (pg.16) I completely agree with Confucius on self-discipline being an important part to a healthy community developing and establishing effective communication, plus deterring crime. He also said the most important relationships are between son and father (pg.17). I would agree with this point also. A father figure can help an adolescent in many ways. A father can promote self -discipline and provide protection for a child. Not to mention develop a loving relationship. This relationship is an incredibly important aspect to ensuring a child grows up with a background rooted in self-discipline. Confucius believed in the golden rule “Do unto others what you would have done for yourself” (pg.19). How could you not agree with this statement? Knowledge is a key component to ethical action (pg.19). Knowledge is always will be evolving every day individually and collectively as a whole. With knowledge, comes power so you have to use it properly and not abuse it. It is an important aspect of ethical action and making smart, thoughtful decisions.
The Confucius theory of human nature advocated that all human beings have the capacity to cultivate virtue and bring themselves into the harmony with the Decree of Heaven. He acknowledged that all human beings are potential sages but that the odds of meeting a sage are very low and that most people live in a dreadful manner. He made it clear that we had no control over our destiny but that as human beings we are very to reject or choose morality and proper conduct, we have the ability to pursue the Decree of Heaven or reject it if we choose, the choice is ours. We always have a choice as to how we choose to live in any given situation. He believed that all human beings are fundamentally the same we just become differentiated by our different ways of living. He implied that human beings are malleable creatures; we can become almost anything we aspire to be from constant molding to achieve our ultimate end game, so to speak. He also placed emphasis on acknowledging that the environment in which we live in molds us to a degree as well as our actions and decisions. In his opinion human life without carefully crafted culture produces disastrous results. On these points I can agree with the Confucius theory of human nature, I do believe that all humans are fundamentally born the same with similar ideals of what is right and wrong and whether we choose to pursue more developed virtues whether religiously based or not is our individual decision. I also agree that our environment shapes some of who we are but I do not think that it has the biggest impact on a person’s life as some would think. Two siblings can come from the exact same upbringing and one can become a doctor who seeks a Decree of Heaven and one can become a drug dealer with little to no virtues, after a certain age and a certain amount of experiences I believe it becomes a matter of personal choices of each individual. I do however acknowledge that based on the economical standing each person is born into it can commend or condemn the amount of opportunities one can receive in pursuit of a successful life. But as Confucius states, we as humans can be virtually anything we aspire to be. There were some things I didn’t agree with in his theory of human nature for instance, comparing women to “small men” that can be difficult to deal with in any household. Seems as though his view on women may have been a little biased based on his own experiences!
Theory of Human Nature: Reasons, Causes, and Free Will The Human theory that I found to be most interesting was Kant’s philosophy about our fundamental sources of our mind. Kant says “Our knowledge springs from two different fundamental sources of the mind. The first is the capacity for receiving representations; the second is the power of knowing an object through these representations. Through the first an object is given to us, through the second the object is thought (pg. 149). Kant’s main points are that knowledge stems from two fundamental sources in our minds. Meaning that seeing an object as it actually appears and being able to think about how to classify that visual object. In order to increase our growth of perceptual knowledge we must experience objects outside of the mind, doing this will create a sensory state caused by those objects. Kant’s analysis says that animals have the sensibility to gain perceptual knowledge but it is assumed that animals lack understanding. The example is that animals can get hurt but lack the ability to understand why they are hurt, or know that they have pain; they are not able to communicate like humans do. A better understanding of this is that animals are not able to say that they love something or another animal is a predator. The main understandings for this are human’s ability to cognitively think and reason. This idea helps to explain natural phenomena. Example on pg. 150 we often want to know why something happens, so we try to explain one fact, or one regularity, in terms of others. Another example is when a cat is chasing a mouse; the cat’s behavior is not justifying this as a mouse but as a source of food. Kant says some of our reasons for action involve only our own desire and factual beliefs. For example I want B, and I believe that A is the best way to achieve B, therefore I should do A. As humans we able to think, categorize, judge others, and rationalize. We understand why we take care of our young, and how to get to work at the same time every day. Kant labels this as “hypothetical imperative” (pg. 151). Kant believed that humans as free, rational being who can make choices that are not predetermined: above all, we are capable of acting on moral reasons, not just on self-interested desires. Pure practical reason or morality is a function of our reason, not just our feelings. One example of this type of situation is that we have the decision to make choices that may be based by moral code. Kant’s analysis says we make choices as humans without further reduction to physical causation. Example: We may feel influences from our personal desires, but our choices that we make are not determined by them. Kant acknowledges the frailty of human nature our difficulty in doing what we know we ought to do and our impurity, or tendency to confuse or adulterate moral reasons with other motives.(pg. 156) He wants us to understand that we are inclined to do good things as humans but not to delay our own happiness from it.
I hesitate to state my critique because I recall there was a bit of emotionally charged debate in class. So, I preface this by saying I do believe there are people (including some in our class) who are motivated to do good for others without expecting to directly reap benefits for themselves. However, I think if we step back and look at the big, big, picture we might see that the world is full of "stuff" and "doing." We must do work to attain stuff we wish to have, therefore tasks that do not seem related to self-interested desires trickle into this category unwittingly. Sartre pointed out that we have radical freedom of choice. He acknowledged that we have certain biological needs to sustain life. Beyond those, we are largely compelled by desire. Why not move to a tropical climate, learn to fish and climb trees, then watch the sun rise and set over the ocean every day for the rest of our time here? Why do we commit to years of school and a lifetime of long hours in physically and mentally demanding jobs if not for the pursuit of self-interested desires?
Confucius’s theory of human nature is that human beings have access to the ultimate reality of heaven’s morality. In part of the explanation of Confucius’s theory of human nature in the Stevenson book it says that humans have no choice for their circumstances but they have the choice of how we live in the given situation. I definitely agree with this statement. When you are born, you are not choosing what situation you are born into. That is not your choice, but it is your choice of how you choose to live through the situation you are given. I believe that this is persuasive because it is still giving the human the ability to choose what path they want to take and gives the human freedom. He also emphasizes that the environment in which one lives, can mold them in certain ways. This means that the environment around the individual will influence them to make certain discussions and cause them to make choices that may be different than people in other environments. I also think it is persuasive because it explains that the situation are born into is not our choice. Also, certain situations we are put in are not our choice but we must choose how to deal with them. I believe this leaves room for an explanation using God. God chooses the situation we are born into. This might not be exactly what Confucius believed but I believe his theory leaves room for this opinion to be added. One of his principles is “do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.” I strongly agree with this principle. It is the whole idea of treating others how you want to be treated. This is one of the most basic human principles. Why would you want to do something to someone that you wouldn’t want them to do to you? Living by this principle increases happiness and human relationships.
I agree with most of what you said here. One thing though that I question is that you say that you are given the choice of how to live through a certain situation. I agree with this to a certain extend. Yes you are born into situations that you do not choose. However, if you are growing up in a situation where you do not know any better that just that situation, one cannot necessarily know that other situations are better. Take the example of a kid being kidnapped at the age of an infant and help captive in a house for the next 10 years without even seeing sunlight. That child doesn't understand how to talk, think, understand, eat properly etc. I know that this is an extreme situation but that child, until found, has no choice on how to live there life. They were never taught from the beginning.
I find Confucianism the most persuasive of the theories of human nature in the Stevenson book as well. Confucius became regarded as “the teacher” in many periods of Chinese history. His teaching emphasized personal governmental mortality, correctness of social relationships justice and sincerity. He believed in strong family loyalty, ancestor worship, respect of elders by their children and of husbands by their wives. I agree with all of that accept for ancestor worship, I think you should respect them and know about them but not worship them I also think there should be respect of the wife from their husband as well. I agree with many of his teachings. I grew up hearing his philosophy of “Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself”. I completely agree with that if you wouldn’t like what you are doing to be done to you then do not do it. His idea of a freedom of will I really agree with, which is; Human beings have no significant choice as to the circumstances of the life they live but we have a choice as to how we live in the given situation. I agree with that, I believe we are given the circumstances that we live in, I think there is a set path of what is going to happen for example predetermined what your job will be or who you will marry but it is up to you what you do with that and how you live your life in the circumstances that you are dealt. I think we can become whatever we want to become but I think what the end result is, is what is already planned out. I don’t agree with his view on women, and I have trouble with his view of human nature being fundamentally uniform. I don’t think everyone’s human nature is the same, I think there are bad and good people, I think everyone has the potential to turn to either side but I don’t think we are all the same or “uniform”. I also agree with the fact that he says “the gentlemen understands what is moral. The small man understands what is profitable”, it is true the people who are all about money and workaholics mostly have nothing else, and end up losing their family. These are the people who only think of themselves and are always asking what I can get out of it. And I just can’t see that person being a good person or good for our economy, all they will have Is their money, if they are selfish that way they have no respect for others and I agree with Confucius when he says it is due to lack of self-discipline and I would add bad morals. I also agree with Confucius in the fact that he advocated for a good government to promote the well-being of the common people and would bring about the harmonious relationships between all citizens and insisted that we live in a moral world. I believe this should be the government’s job to advocate for the citizens, to keep the nation safe and to be moral themselves. Overall I agree with most of the Confucianism ideas.
I personally like Sartre's ideas of freedom, tying in the theory of existentialism. The first aspect of Sartre's formula that stands out to me the most is the idea that "man's existence precedes his essence" (page 186). This is explained by saying humans have not been created for any particular purpose, we simply find ourselves existing by no choice of our own and have to decide what to make of ourselves, so each of us must create our own nature or "essence". To Sartre and other existentialists, human beings, through their consciousness, create their own values and determine a meaning for their own life. By creating our own values, we are creating the best form of our individual self. According to Sartre, there is no general truth to what we 'ought' or 'want' to be. I particularly like this point because it is as if we are just placed on earth with a blank slate and a consciousness, with no predispositions, and it is solely up to us to choose and create whatever life we want to live, free of social or spiritual expectations. I do not find the life for me somewhere out there, but instead I, alone, create and build the life I want to live. The next point that stands out to be the most is when Sartre said "we are condemned to be free" (page 187). There is no limit to our freedom, except that we cannot cease being free. To me, it is as if Sartre is suggesting that although freedom is such a great and empowering part of us, it is also leads to a struggle an individual will face as they cope with the freedom to which they are entitled. I, myself, am the only one responsible for who I chose to be and what I chose to do. Sartre then explains the idea of the mental power of negation, which involves the freedom of mind and the freedom of action. To existentialists, this means, each individual has the freedom to imagine new possibilities and the freedom to try to actualize these possibilities and make them into realities. The next point of Sartre's might be my favorite and that is "we are responsible for our emotions, for they are ways in which we chose to react to the world" (page 188). There is a quote by Alan Watts that I once heard that says "all that you see out in front of you is how you feel inside your head". It all comes from within. You have yourself to hold responsible for what you feel and see in the world. If someone is angry at themselves for doing something wrong, and then stops seeing the wrong they did, their anger goes away. We feel the way we make ourselves feel, and respond the way we make ourselves respond. Sartre's next idea of bad faith vs. good faith and anguish is also very important to understanding and practicing human freedom. Sartre states that our consciousness of freedom is draining and humans want nothing more to not have to make anymore choices for ourselves, but Sartre reminds us that we are not essentially anything and we are not defined or determined by our roles given to us by society. Therefore, we cannot let society make decisions for us and decide and label us to be something other than what we create for ourselves. The final point of Sartre that I like is the idea of an authentic self that we are entitled to create. A lack of authenticity is bad faith, because in that situation an individual is trying to represent their attitudes or actions by what is determined by others in their life or the bigger society. We are to follow the life we want to live for ourselves, despite what our parents or friends or social class expects of us. There will always be this external pressure to be a certain type of person or pick a certain career and there is the struggle to want to comply to live a more comfortable life. But we cannot escape our freedom. We are condemned to our freedom, and therefore, have to create our own authentic self and we will not find this authentic self, adhering to the lives those around us want us to live. We belong to no one but ourselves. We are free.
I find that Confucius is the most persuasive theory out of all the other theories that we have gone over thus far. Confucius believed that there were forces in our universe that determined our lives and they are the Decree of Heaven and Destiny. Confucius said that "Heaven is author of the virtue that is in me" which demonstrates his conviction that human beings have access to the ultimate reality of Heaven's morality. He believes that every person is potentially a sage, defined as one who acts with extreme benevolence. Meaning that all human beings have the capacity to cultivate and bring themselves into harmony with the Decree of Heaven. The most important virtue that a human can possess for Confucius is benevolence and to express this virtue is to achieve moral perfection. I can agree with Confucius that everyone has the potential of being morally perfect like a sage, but like Confucius says we have the choice if we want to either resist or try to pursue the Decree of Heaven/being perfectly moral within our lives. Confucius also mentions that we have no control over our own destiny and that one's place in life such as social success, wealth, and longevity are all due to destiny. He goes onto say that human beings are fundamentally the same, we simply become differentiated due to our different ways of being. Human beings malleable and that we can become almost anything. We are unfinished and impressible, and in need of constant molding to achieve our ultimate end of moral perfection. Confucius suggests that our environment and ways of being significantly determine our character. I also agree with Confucius on these concepts because we are all born the same but it's our choices in life and what we choose to do between right and wrong that ends up changing us and our success to moral perfection. Also the environment can determine our character such as the people we choose to surround ourselves with either good or bad. Confucius also believe in the golden rule and I too believe that we should treat others the way that you would want to be treated. Following the golden rule also helps us try to reach our goal of moral perfection as well.
Julie, i totally agree with you! i think that Confucius is the most persuasive theory that we've learned about so far. i like what you said that we choose to do right and wrong. I like his teachings.
I agree I think that Confucius is the best theory and the most I agree with. I like what you said that the environment can determine our character because I completely agree with that. I also like his teaching on the golden rule I always heard that growing up!
One theory of human nature in the Stevenson book that I find to be the persuasive is Satre’s radical freedom. Satre focused a lot on the theory of existentialism, which focused on the uniqueness of each individual and their life situation, meaning or the purpose of human’s lives, and freedom- the ability of each individual to choose their own actions and act upon those actions. I thought it was interesting how Satre makes two distinctions between two modes of being and not two substances or beings. Also, there was a difference between reflective consciousness (positional) and prereflective consciousness (non-positional). To elaborate this concept, I quote on pg. 186 states that “all consciousness is ‘positional’ consciousness of something taken to be distinct from the subject. But every positional consciousness of an object is at the same time a non-positional consciousness of itself” (Stevenson). What I tend to believe the most of Satre’s theory is that we are not created for a particular purpose and what must decide what to make of ourselves, which creates our own essence. Personally, I think we decide our own path in life and we have no destiny- we create it. So my beliefs about our existence are similar to Satre’s. I also liked his idea of negation that involves the freedom of mind and freedom of action, for example, on page 188 it states, “To be conscious is to be continually faced with choices about what to think and what to do” (Stevenson). I think that is very true, our conscious is constantly faced and has to decide what decision is the right one to make. Additionally, I also agree with Satre’s approach that we feel the way we make ourselves feel and we respond they way we make ourselves feel. I think a lot of things in life are our reactions to the situations we are put it. We can choose to make the best of that situation and think positive, or choose to find the negatives in the situation and react with anger or sadness. I am also in agreement that we are responsible for the emotions we feel based on our experiences. I believe that we do have the freedom in the way we think, feel, and act- it is completely up to us to decide. Another theory of Satre’s that I tend to agree with is the idea that we are always free to try to become different than what we are. I think if there is something about us that we don’t like, to an extent (not in extreme cases like poverty, or some physical changes, more so aspects of our personality), we can change it. For instance, if I don’t like that I always procrastinate on my homework and that it affects my grades, I am free to try to become a person who is on top of my schoolwork. I agree with him when he says that the more we are aware of our own anger, pride, or self-centeredness then the more capable we are of change. I think we do have to be aware of our flaws and its important to accept those first in order to be able to change them. Furthermore, I also tend to agree with the idea that we are responsible for our actions, attitudes, emotions, and characters. We ultimately control our actions and must take initiative to own up to those actions. This helps humans change us for the better. In terms of Satre’s view of human nature and human needs, I think it is important that all of us find the meaning and purpose of their lives.
In addition, there are some aspects of Confucianism I also tend to agree with. For instance, in Confucius’s theory of human nature it states that humans have no choice for the circumstances they were born into, but they have the choice of how to live in that given situation. I agree with this statement, because when we are born, we are not choosing the environment we are born into. However, it is our choice to decide how we are going to deal with that particular situation. This theory helps shape us into who we are and gives us personal freedom to decide who we want to be and how we want to live our lives. Also, I agree that our environment does help shape who we are. Different people come from different backgrounds and experiences and I think those factors influence who we are.
I also agree with a lot of Confucius ideas, especially like the one you stated regarding how we don’t get to choose the situations we are born into but we do get to choose how we react to them. I also agree that our environment plays a big role in helping to create who we are. The world we grow up in shapes the type of things we know and learn. But I do think that we still have the ability to become something different that the world we were born into and raised in. I think we have the ability to change who we are, regardless of how we started out.
I find the chapter on Upanishadic Hinduism to be the most persuasive theory of human nature in the Stevenson text. (Note that this is one of many types of Hinduism. There is much diversity in beliefs and practices in Hinduism, just as there is some [definitely less] diversity within Christianity.) The chapter is subtitled “Quest for Ultimate Knowledge” because a major component of this type of Hinduism is metaphysical inquiry. Much of the sacred texts discuss the true nature of being, of the universe, and of divinity. “Brahman” has many meanings in Hinduism, one of which has been translated to “the very force that sustains the world.” It is a force that both is the universe and permeates every thing in the universe. One inherent meaning here is that we (humans) are all plugged into the same circuitry, connecting us to a divine source and also to each other. On page 30 of the text, brahman is used to discuss the why behind the Hindu version of The Big Bang Theory. The explanation sounds very much like the creation story in the Christian Bible. Another tenet of Hinduism is that the world of concrete things is ever changing, but the divine source is ever-present and unchanging. This, to me, is also reminiscent of Christian teachings. Hinduism additionally speaks of ego, discussing how we become identified with a persona we know as our “self”. Being focused on the physical world, we forget that we are spiritual beings. In fact, Hinduism recognizes that being of this world is not the ultimate aim. Instead, liberation from the cycle of birth and death is the goal. Consider that for a moment-that this existence is only a layover in the ultimate trip where the destination is to be formless. This should sound familiar, though the wording is different. Is not the world of spirit (Heaven) an ultimate destination in Christianity? As I learn more of world religions I see that while we tend to focus on our own familial beliefs, there are many similarities in other systems of which we have little knowledge. I greatly appreciate that Hinduism clearly states we are all one, we are part of Divinity as It is part of us, and the “I” we identify with is a mask that conceals our true and infinite nature.
Confucius said to worry about life and not death. He emphasized that the environment plays a large role in shaping us. Confucius’s theory of human nature advocated that all human beings don’t have a choice for their circumstances but they have a choice on how to live. I believe that both the environment and our genetics play a large role in shaping who we are as people. I think that some people can be born into great families but still be an evil person or that someone could be born into an awful family but turn out to be an amazing person. I do think that the environment that someone grows up in does play an important role in shaping who we are as people. I believe that my values stem from my family and how I was raised. I think that if I was born into a different family then I would have some different values. I think that Confucius is right about not having the choice on certain circumstances but they have a choice on how to live. People never know what life is going to throw at them. Unexpected things happen all the time but it’s ultimately our choice on how we are going to live our life. We don’t get to choose certain circumstances that happen to us. Sometimes we are born into certain circumstances. It is our choice to make the most out of these circumstances. We can let things drag us down and make us miserable or we can rise above it and live every day to the fullest. Confucius also believes in the idea of destiny. While I don’t necessary believe that my wealth or social success are because of destiny I do believe that everyone has a purpose. I don’t think everything in their life is already predetermined or anything but I do believe that there is a specific purpose for everyone on earth. Lastly I like how he said to worry about life and not death. If someone is always dwelling and worrying about death they aren’t truly going to live. People need to learn to live life to the fullest.
I like what you said about how we never know what life throws at us, but we have the choice on how we live our life. I agree with this alot because it is very accurate that we truly never know what is going to happen next in our life and never know what situation we may be put in. But we have the choice about how we live through thee situations and make of it.
I would have to agree with Sartre’s ideas of radical freedom regarding human nature and his focus on existentialism. I like how this idea includes the belief that we are not born for any particular reason, we don’t have a fate or destiny already planned out for us to follow along. We create who we are just by living, we create our own essence- starting out with a blank slate controlled by only us. There is a quote on page 188 that states “To be conscious is to be continually faced with choices about what to think and what to do.” We create our values and decide what we want our lives to be. Every action comes with a consequence and we know that, and that is how we build up who we are. We are all unique and free individuals. I also agree with Sartre’s opinion that we control how we react to situations. We are the only ones responsible for feeling the way we do, no one makes us feel mad or sad or happy; we choose to react to them or a situation in that way. We are the ones responsible for our actions and reactions, not everyone else. We have the ability to let a situation control us emotionally and get really upset or mad about it, or we can rise above it and move on. This is part of our freedom- we are free to think, act, feel, and be whatever we choose. On page 187, Sartre states “we are condemned to be free.” Sartre believes that we have no limits on our freedoms other than that we cannot cease to be free. I think by saying this, Sartre is trying to convey that our freedom is not always smooth sailing, we will be faced with struggles that come with our freedoms and it is up to us to get past them. Sartre also talks about the existentialist idea of negation- freedom of the mind and action. This means that we are free to think of and create new possibilities for ourselves. At any point in time, we have the right and the ability to change the course that our lives are on. If we have stumbled onto a path we don’t like, we get to change it- no one can change it for us. Another idea of Sartre’s that I believe is his idea of an ‘authentic self’ that we create. Not having authenticity is bad faith because we are not accurately and truly representing ourselves. We live an authentic life by living the lives we imagine and want for ourselves, regardless of what those around us say or think. We answer to ourselves and we are responsible for ourselves- our actions are ours and so are the consequences.
I find the Confucius theory of human nature to be the most persuasive. Confucianism takes a positive, and optimistic outlook on human nature. This way of thinking focuses on how incredible the human race is and can be. Confucian believed that humans were highly teachable, improvable, and perfectible. While everyone is capable of becoming a wise sage, Confucian is aware that some do not and he thinks this has to do with humans ability to freely chose between what is right and what is wrong. The main education that comes into play when making that choice comes from the environment what one lives in and it ability to shape us as human beings. Ultimately Confucian says that the result of being moral and benevolent is joy. I think this one is the most persuasive because for one I already agree with most of it when pertaining to human nature and two I think it is still applicable and relevant today.
Confucius advocated good government that would promote the well-being of the common people and would bring about the harmonious relationships between all citizens and insisted that we live in a moral world (pg. 11). I agree with him on this. I do believe that the government’s main job is to advocate for safe communities and a nation that strides for healthy relationships. It is an important aspect for any society to develop moral codes of conduct to follow in order to ensure the safety for all. That’s where the government comes in. Organizations such as the police and fire department, the military, the Corporation for National and Community Service, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Equal or the Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) all are in place to protect its citizens and create a sustainable atmosphere where the basic needs of its citizens are meant. Basic needs such as food, clothing, shelter, and a nation that is well-protected are fortunately provided and able to be utilized in most situations. That is why any government aimed at creating a country where an individual person can move up, so to speak, regardless of social class is one that advocates and promotes for the well-being of the common people. We are used this concept in our “great” country and the idea that our individual effort can catapult us to the top. This is the staple of America, fueling its consumption and capitalistic style of thinking in any situation. I believe where one is raised and how they were brought along with the opportunities provided to oneself dictate how they will be able to live the rest of their life (i.e. move up). That is one greatest perks of living in the USA. However, is this possible for all persons? Specifically those in third world countries?
ReplyDeleteConfucius thought that everything that occurs in someone’s life is one’s destiny and fate is predetermined; no personal acts will change one’s fate (pg. 12). I completely agree with him on this statement 100%, something I would have disagreed only a few months ago. Recently I went on a medical mission trip to Nicaragua. Talk about extreme poverty… approximately 65% of the country is unemployed. As you can imagine people living in the worst of the poverty and poorest parts of the country have absolutely nothing. No running water, electricity, medicine, clean water, or sanitation in general. Not to mention there is absolutely no options for a job at all. They live off the land per say. They are fighters and all so happy to be alive and see us. I do not believe they could change their fate? Who am I to suggest what they think a good life is…or the ideas they have of “moving up”? From my perspective I see no feasible way of getting out of many of those peoples’ situations... the absolute poverty most likely due to the ability of not being able to find a job. That’s all they know… dirt roads, dirty water and a dirty governmental system that doesn’t promote the well-being of the common good for all people. Government seemed be much less prominent there and there are no agencies that help the citizens of that truly beautiful nation. The help just didn’t exist and that is a direct connection between limited resources and a blind eye turned by the guys at the top. Overall the experience was eye opening and humbling. It was quite sad but refreshing to see smiles and hugs from all of the little children, who were very eager to climb all over me. It was a great experience.
Continuation of post:
DeleteAnother aspect Confucius touches on is that we know nothing about heaven (pg.12)
In Analects, specifically the Diagnosis section, Confucius outlines five sins or downfalls of human nature (pg.14): People are attached to profit, society lacks the respect of filial piety meaning respect for one's father, elders, and ancestors, the connection between word and action cannot be trusted, ignorance regarding the Way of the sages prevails, and lastly benevolence is absent from human affairs. I agree with Confucius on these principles and where man lacks self-discipline. Human existence is based on self-discipline (pg.16) I completely agree with Confucius on self-discipline being an important part to a healthy community developing and establishing effective communication, plus deterring crime.
He also said the most important relationships are between son and father (pg.17). I would agree with this point also. A father figure can help an adolescent in many ways. A father can promote self -discipline and provide protection for a child. Not to mention develop a loving relationship. This relationship is an incredibly important aspect to ensuring a child grows up with a background rooted in self-discipline. Confucius believed in the golden rule “Do unto others what you would have done for yourself” (pg.19). How could you not agree with this statement?
Knowledge is a key component to ethical action (pg.19). Knowledge is always will be evolving every day individually and collectively as a whole. With knowledge, comes power so you have to use it properly and not abuse it. It is an important aspect of ethical action and making smart, thoughtful decisions.
The Confucius theory of human nature advocated that all human beings have the capacity to cultivate virtue and bring themselves into the harmony with the Decree of Heaven. He acknowledged that all human beings are potential sages but that the odds of meeting a sage are very low and that most people live in a dreadful manner. He made it clear that we had no control over our destiny but that as human beings we are very to reject or choose morality and proper conduct, we have the ability to pursue the Decree of Heaven or reject it if we choose, the choice is ours. We always have a choice as to how we choose to live in any given situation. He believed that all human beings are fundamentally the same we just become differentiated by our different ways of living. He implied that human beings are malleable creatures; we can become almost anything we aspire to be from constant molding to achieve our ultimate end game, so to speak. He also placed emphasis on acknowledging that the environment in which we live in molds us to a degree as well as our actions and decisions. In his opinion human life without carefully crafted culture produces disastrous results. On these points I can agree with the Confucius theory of human nature, I do believe that all humans are fundamentally born the same with similar ideals of what is right and wrong and whether we choose to pursue more developed virtues whether religiously based or not is our individual decision. I also agree that our environment shapes some of who we are but I do not think that it has the biggest impact on a person’s life as some would think. Two siblings can come from the exact same upbringing and one can become a doctor who seeks a Decree of Heaven and one can become a drug dealer with little to no virtues, after a certain age and a certain amount of experiences I believe it becomes a matter of personal choices of each individual. I do however acknowledge that based on the economical standing each person is born into it can commend or condemn the amount of opportunities one can receive in pursuit of a successful life. But as Confucius states, we as humans can be virtually anything we aspire to be. There were some things I didn’t agree with in his theory of human nature for instance, comparing women to “small men” that can be difficult to deal with in any household. Seems as though his view on women may have been a little biased based on his own experiences!
ReplyDeleteTheory of Human Nature:
ReplyDeleteReasons, Causes, and Free Will
The Human theory that I found to be most interesting was Kant’s philosophy about our fundamental sources of our mind. Kant says “Our knowledge springs from two different fundamental sources of the mind. The first is the capacity for receiving representations; the second is the power of knowing an object through these representations. Through the first an object is given to us, through the second the object is thought (pg. 149). Kant’s main points are that knowledge stems from two fundamental sources in our minds. Meaning that seeing an object as it actually appears and being able to think about how to classify that visual object. In order to increase our growth of perceptual knowledge we must experience objects outside of the mind, doing this will create a sensory state caused by those objects. Kant’s analysis says that animals have the sensibility to gain perceptual knowledge but it is assumed that animals lack understanding. The example is that animals can get hurt but lack the ability to understand why they are hurt, or know that they have pain; they are not able to communicate like humans do. A better understanding of this is that animals are not able to say that they love something or another animal is a predator. The main understandings for this are human’s ability to cognitively think and reason. This idea helps to explain natural phenomena. Example on pg. 150 we often want to know why something happens, so we try to explain one fact, or one regularity, in terms of others. Another example is when a cat is chasing a mouse; the cat’s behavior is not justifying this as a mouse but as a source of food. Kant says some of our reasons for action involve only our own desire and factual beliefs. For example I want B, and I believe that A is the best way to achieve B, therefore I should do A. As humans we able to think, categorize, judge others, and rationalize. We understand why we take care of our young, and how to get to work at the same time every day. Kant labels this as “hypothetical imperative” (pg. 151). Kant believed that humans as free, rational being who can make choices that are not predetermined: above all, we are capable of acting on moral reasons, not just on self-interested desires. Pure practical reason or morality is a function of our reason, not just our feelings. One example of this type of situation is that we have the decision to make choices that may be based by moral code. Kant’s analysis says we make choices as humans without further reduction to physical causation. Example: We may feel influences from our personal desires, but our choices that we make are not determined by them. Kant acknowledges the frailty of human nature our difficulty in doing what we know we ought to do and our impurity, or tendency to confuse or adulterate moral reasons with other motives.(pg. 156) He wants us to understand that we are inclined to do good things as humans but not to delay our own happiness from it.
I hesitate to state my critique because I recall there was a bit of emotionally charged debate in class. So, I preface this by saying I do believe there are people (including some in our class) who are motivated to do good for others without expecting to directly reap benefits for themselves. However, I think if we step back and look at the big, big, picture we might see that the world is full of "stuff" and "doing." We must do work to attain stuff we wish to have, therefore tasks that do not seem related to self-interested desires trickle into this category unwittingly. Sartre pointed out that we have radical freedom of choice. He acknowledged that we have certain biological needs to sustain life. Beyond those, we are largely compelled by desire. Why not move to a tropical climate, learn to fish and climb trees, then watch the sun rise and set over the ocean every day for the rest of our time here? Why do we commit to years of school and a lifetime of long hours in physically and mentally demanding jobs if not for the pursuit of self-interested desires?
DeleteConfucius’s theory of human nature is that human beings have access to the ultimate reality of heaven’s morality. In part of the explanation of Confucius’s theory of human nature in the Stevenson book it says that humans have no choice for their circumstances but they have the choice of how we live in the given situation. I definitely agree with this statement. When you are born, you are not choosing what situation you are born into. That is not your choice, but it is your choice of how you choose to live through the situation you are given. I believe that this is persuasive because it is still giving the human the ability to choose what path they want to take and gives the human freedom. He also emphasizes that the environment in which one lives, can mold them in certain ways. This means that the environment around the individual will influence them to make certain discussions and cause them to make choices that may be different than people in other environments. I also think it is persuasive because it explains that the situation are born into is not our choice. Also, certain situations we are put in are not our choice but we must choose how to deal with them. I believe this leaves room for an explanation using God. God chooses the situation we are born into. This might not be exactly what Confucius believed but I believe his theory leaves room for this opinion to be added. One of his principles is “do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself.” I strongly agree with this principle. It is the whole idea of treating others how you want to be treated. This is one of the most basic human principles. Why would you want to do something to someone that you wouldn’t want them to do to you? Living by this principle increases happiness and human relationships.
ReplyDeleteKelly,
DeleteI agree with most of what you said here. One thing though that I question is that you say that you are given the choice of how to live through a certain situation. I agree with this to a certain extend. Yes you are born into situations that you do not choose. However, if you are growing up in a situation where you do not know any better that just that situation, one cannot necessarily know that other situations are better. Take the example of a kid being kidnapped at the age of an infant and help captive in a house for the next 10 years without even seeing sunlight. That child doesn't understand how to talk, think, understand, eat properly etc. I know that this is an extreme situation but that child, until found, has no choice on how to live there life. They were never taught from the beginning.
I find Confucianism the most persuasive of the theories of human nature in the Stevenson book as well. Confucius became regarded as “the teacher” in many periods of Chinese history. His teaching emphasized personal governmental mortality, correctness of social relationships justice and sincerity. He believed in strong family loyalty, ancestor worship, respect of elders by their children and of husbands by their wives. I agree with all of that accept for ancestor worship, I think you should respect them and know about them but not worship them I also think there should be respect of the wife from their husband as well. I agree with many of his teachings. I grew up hearing his philosophy of “Do not do to others what you do not want done to yourself”. I completely agree with that if you wouldn’t like what you are doing to be done to you then do not do it. His idea of a freedom of will I really agree with, which is; Human beings have no significant choice as to the circumstances of the life they live but we have a choice as to how we live in the given situation. I agree with that, I believe we are given the circumstances that we live in, I think there is a set path of what is going to happen for example predetermined what your job will be or who you will marry but it is up to you what you do with that and how you live your life in the circumstances that you are dealt. I think we can become whatever we want to become but I think what the end result is, is what is already planned out. I don’t agree with his view on women, and I have trouble with his view of human nature being fundamentally uniform. I don’t think everyone’s human nature is the same, I think there are bad and good people, I think everyone has the potential to turn to either side but I don’t think we are all the same or “uniform”. I also agree with the fact that he says “the gentlemen understands what is moral. The small man understands what is profitable”, it is true the people who are all about money and workaholics mostly have nothing else, and end up losing their family. These are the people who only think of themselves and are always asking what I can get out of it. And I just can’t see that person being a good person or good for our economy, all they will have Is their money, if they are selfish that way they have no respect for others and I agree with Confucius when he says it is due to lack of self-discipline and I would add bad morals. I also agree with Confucius in the fact that he advocated for a good government to promote the well-being of the common people and would bring about the harmonious relationships between all citizens and insisted that we live in a moral world. I believe this should be the government’s job to advocate for the citizens, to keep the nation safe and to be moral themselves. Overall I agree with most of the Confucianism ideas.
ReplyDeleteI personally like Sartre's ideas of freedom, tying in the theory of existentialism. The first aspect of Sartre's formula that stands out to me the most is the idea that "man's existence precedes his essence" (page 186). This is explained by saying humans have not been created for any particular purpose, we simply find ourselves existing by no choice of our own and have to decide what to make of ourselves, so each of us must create our own nature or "essence". To Sartre and other existentialists, human beings, through their consciousness, create their own values and determine a meaning for their own life. By creating our own values, we are creating the best form of our individual self. According to Sartre, there is no general truth to what we 'ought' or 'want' to be. I particularly like this point because it is as if we are just placed on earth with a blank slate and a consciousness, with no predispositions, and it is solely up to us to choose and create whatever life we want to live, free of social or spiritual expectations. I do not find the life for me somewhere out there, but instead I, alone, create and build the life I want to live. The next point that stands out to be the most is when Sartre said "we are condemned to be free" (page 187). There is no limit to our freedom, except that we cannot cease being free. To me, it is as if Sartre is suggesting that although freedom is such a great and empowering part of us, it is also leads to a struggle an individual will face as they cope with the freedom to which they are entitled. I, myself, am the only one responsible for who I chose to be and what I chose to do. Sartre then explains the idea of the mental power of negation, which involves the freedom of mind and the freedom of action. To existentialists, this means, each individual has the freedom to imagine new possibilities and the freedom to try to actualize these possibilities and make them into realities. The next point of Sartre's might be my favorite and that is "we are responsible for our emotions, for they are ways in which we chose to react to the world" (page 188). There is a quote by Alan Watts that I once heard that says "all that you see out in front of you is how you feel inside your head". It all comes from within. You have yourself to hold responsible for what you feel and see in the world. If someone is angry at themselves for doing something wrong, and then stops seeing the wrong they did, their anger goes away. We feel the way we make ourselves feel, and respond the way we make ourselves respond. Sartre's next idea of bad faith vs. good faith and anguish is also very important to understanding and practicing human freedom. Sartre states that our consciousness of freedom is draining and humans want nothing more to not have to make anymore choices for ourselves, but Sartre reminds us that we are not essentially anything and we are not defined or determined by our roles given to us by society. Therefore, we cannot let society make decisions for us and decide and label us to be something other than what we create for ourselves. The final point of Sartre that I like is the idea of an authentic self that we are entitled to create. A lack of authenticity is bad faith, because in that situation an individual is trying to represent their attitudes or actions by what is determined by others in their life or the bigger society. We are to follow the life we want to live for ourselves, despite what our parents or friends or social class expects of us. There will always be this external pressure to be a certain type of person or pick a certain career and there is the struggle to want to comply to live a more comfortable life. But we cannot escape our freedom. We are condemned to our freedom, and therefore, have to create our own authentic self and we will not find this authentic self, adhering to the lives those around us want us to live. We belong to no one but ourselves. We are free.
ReplyDeleteI find that Confucius is the most persuasive theory out of all the other theories that we have gone over thus far. Confucius believed that there were forces in our universe that determined our lives and they are the Decree of Heaven and Destiny. Confucius said that "Heaven is author of the virtue that is in me" which demonstrates his conviction that human beings have access to the ultimate reality of Heaven's morality. He believes that every person is potentially a sage, defined as one who acts with extreme benevolence. Meaning that all human beings have the capacity to cultivate and bring themselves into harmony with the Decree of Heaven. The most important virtue that a human can possess for Confucius is benevolence and to express this virtue is to achieve moral perfection. I can agree with Confucius that everyone has the potential of being morally perfect like a sage, but like Confucius says we have the choice if we want to either resist or try to pursue the Decree of Heaven/being perfectly moral within our lives. Confucius also mentions that we have no control over our own destiny and that one's place in life such as social success, wealth, and longevity are all due to destiny. He goes onto say that human beings are fundamentally the same, we simply become differentiated due to our different ways of being. Human beings malleable and that we can become almost anything. We are unfinished and impressible, and in need of constant molding to achieve our ultimate end of moral perfection. Confucius suggests that our environment and ways of being significantly determine our character. I also agree with Confucius on these concepts because we are all born the same but it's our choices in life and what we choose to do between right and wrong that ends up changing us and our success to moral perfection. Also the environment can determine our character such as the people we choose to surround ourselves with either good or bad. Confucius also believe in the golden rule and I too believe that we should treat others the way that you would want to be treated. Following the golden rule also helps us try to reach our goal of moral perfection as well.
ReplyDeleteJulie,
Deletei totally agree with you! i think that Confucius is the most persuasive theory that we've learned about so far. i like what you said that we choose to do right and wrong. I like his teachings.
I agree I think that Confucius is the best theory and the most I agree with. I like what you said that the environment can determine our character because I completely agree with that. I also like his teaching on the golden rule I always heard that growing up!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOne theory of human nature in the Stevenson book that I find to be the persuasive is Satre’s radical freedom. Satre focused a lot on the theory of existentialism, which focused on the uniqueness of each individual and their life situation, meaning or the purpose of human’s lives, and freedom- the ability of each individual to choose their own actions and act upon those actions. I thought it was interesting how Satre makes two distinctions between two modes of being and not two substances or beings. Also, there was a difference between reflective consciousness (positional) and prereflective consciousness (non-positional). To elaborate this concept, I quote on pg. 186 states that “all consciousness is ‘positional’ consciousness of something taken to be distinct from the subject. But every positional consciousness of an object is at the same time a non-positional consciousness of itself” (Stevenson). What I tend to believe the most of Satre’s theory is that we are not created for a particular purpose and what must decide what to make of ourselves, which creates our own essence. Personally, I think we decide our own path in life and we have no destiny- we create it. So my beliefs about our existence are similar to Satre’s. I also liked his idea of negation that involves the freedom of mind and freedom of action, for example, on page 188 it states, “To be conscious is to be continually faced with choices about what to think and what to do” (Stevenson). I think that is very true, our conscious is constantly faced and has to decide what decision is the right one to make. Additionally, I also agree with Satre’s approach that we feel the way we make ourselves feel and we respond they way we make ourselves feel. I think a lot of things in life are our reactions to the situations we are put it. We can choose to make the best of that situation and think positive, or choose to find the negatives in the situation and react with anger or sadness. I am also in agreement that we are responsible for the emotions we feel based on our experiences. I believe that we do have the freedom in the way we think, feel, and act- it is completely up to us to decide. Another theory of Satre’s that I tend to agree with is the idea that we are always free to try to become different than what we are. I think if there is something about us that we don’t like, to an extent (not in extreme cases like poverty, or some physical changes, more so aspects of our personality), we can change it. For instance, if I don’t like that I always procrastinate on my homework and that it affects my grades, I am free to try to become a person who is on top of my schoolwork. I agree with him when he says that the more we are aware of our own anger, pride, or self-centeredness then the more capable we are of change. I think we do have to be aware of our flaws and its important to accept those first in order to be able to change them. Furthermore, I also tend to agree with the idea that we are responsible for our actions, attitudes, emotions, and characters. We ultimately control our actions and must take initiative to own up to those actions. This helps humans change us for the better. In terms of Satre’s view of human nature and human needs, I think it is important that all of us find the meaning and purpose of their lives.
DeleteIn addition, there are some aspects of Confucianism I also tend to agree with. For instance, in Confucius’s theory of human nature it states that humans have no choice for the circumstances they were born into, but they have the choice of how to live in that given situation. I agree with this statement, because when we are born, we are not choosing the environment we are born into. However, it is our choice to decide how we are going to deal with that particular situation. This theory helps shape us into who we are and gives us personal freedom to decide who we want to be and how we want to live our lives. Also, I agree that our environment does help shape who we are. Different people come from different backgrounds and experiences and I think those factors influence who we are.
DeleteI also agree with a lot of Confucius ideas, especially like the one you stated regarding how we don’t get to choose the situations we are born into but we do get to choose how we react to them. I also agree that our environment plays a big role in helping to create who we are. The world we grow up in shapes the type of things we know and learn. But I do think that we still have the ability to become something different that the world we were born into and raised in. I think we have the ability to change who we are, regardless of how we started out.
DeleteI find the chapter on Upanishadic Hinduism to be the most persuasive theory of human nature in the Stevenson text. (Note that this is one of many types of Hinduism. There is much diversity in beliefs and practices in Hinduism, just as there is some [definitely less] diversity within Christianity.) The chapter is subtitled “Quest for Ultimate Knowledge” because a major component of this type of Hinduism is metaphysical inquiry. Much of the sacred texts discuss the true nature of being, of the universe, and of divinity. “Brahman” has many meanings in Hinduism, one of which has been translated to “the very force that sustains the world.” It is a force that both is the universe and permeates every thing in the universe. One inherent meaning here is that we (humans) are all plugged into the same circuitry, connecting us to a divine source and also to each other. On page 30 of the text, brahman is used to discuss the why behind the Hindu version of The Big Bang Theory. The explanation sounds very much like the creation story in the Christian Bible. Another tenet of Hinduism is that the world of concrete things is ever changing, but the divine source is ever-present and unchanging. This, to me, is also reminiscent of Christian teachings. Hinduism additionally speaks of ego, discussing how we become identified with a persona we know as our “self”. Being focused on the physical world, we forget that we are spiritual beings. In fact, Hinduism recognizes that being of this world is not the ultimate aim. Instead, liberation from the cycle of birth and death is the goal. Consider that for a moment-that this existence is only a layover in the ultimate trip where the destination is to be formless. This should sound familiar, though the wording is different. Is not the world of spirit (Heaven) an ultimate destination in Christianity? As I learn more of world religions I see that while we tend to focus on our own familial beliefs, there are many similarities in other systems of which we have little knowledge. I greatly appreciate that Hinduism clearly states we are all one, we are part of Divinity as It is part of us, and the “I” we identify with is a mask that conceals our true and infinite nature.
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying one is right and one is wrong. But I am curious what made Hinduism more appealing/persuasive than Confucianism to you?
DeleteConfucius said to worry about life and not death. He emphasized that the environment plays a large role in shaping us. Confucius’s theory of human nature advocated that all human beings don’t have a choice for their circumstances but they have a choice on how to live. I believe that both the environment and our genetics play a large role in shaping who we are as people. I think that some people can be born into great families but still be an evil person or that someone could be born into an awful family but turn out to be an amazing person. I do think that the environment that someone grows up in does play an important role in shaping who we are as people. I believe that my values stem from my family and how I was raised. I think that if I was born into a different family then I would have some different values. I think that Confucius is right about not having the choice on certain circumstances but they have a choice on how to live. People never know what life is going to throw at them. Unexpected things happen all the time but it’s ultimately our choice on how we are going to live our life. We don’t get to choose certain circumstances that happen to us. Sometimes we are born into certain circumstances. It is our choice to make the most out of these circumstances. We can let things drag us down and make us miserable or we can rise above it and live every day to the fullest. Confucius also believes in the idea of destiny. While I don’t necessary believe that my wealth or social success are because of destiny I do believe that everyone has a purpose. I don’t think everything in their life is already predetermined or anything but I do believe that there is a specific purpose for everyone on earth. Lastly I like how he said to worry about life and not death. If someone is always dwelling and worrying about death they aren’t truly going to live. People need to learn to live life to the fullest.
ReplyDeleteI like what you said about how we never know what life throws at us, but we have the choice on how we live our life. I agree with this alot because it is very accurate that we truly never know what is going to happen next in our life and never know what situation we may be put in. But we have the choice about how we live through thee situations and make of it.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree with Sartre’s ideas of radical freedom regarding human nature and his focus on existentialism. I like how this idea includes the belief that we are not born for any particular reason, we don’t have a fate or destiny already planned out for us to follow along. We create who we are just by living, we create our own essence- starting out with a blank slate controlled by only us. There is a quote on page 188 that states “To be conscious is to be continually faced with choices about what to think and what to do.” We create our values and decide what we want our lives to be. Every action comes with a consequence and we know that, and that is how we build up who we are. We are all unique and free individuals. I also agree with Sartre’s opinion that we control how we react to situations. We are the only ones responsible for feeling the way we do, no one makes us feel mad or sad or happy; we choose to react to them or a situation in that way. We are the ones responsible for our actions and reactions, not everyone else. We have the ability to let a situation control us emotionally and get really upset or mad about it, or we can rise above it and move on. This is part of our freedom- we are free to think, act, feel, and be whatever we choose. On page 187, Sartre states “we are condemned to be free.” Sartre believes that we have no limits on our freedoms other than that we cannot cease to be free. I think by saying this, Sartre is trying to convey that our freedom is not always smooth sailing, we will be faced with struggles that come with our freedoms and it is up to us to get past them. Sartre also talks about the existentialist idea of negation- freedom of the mind and action. This means that we are free to think of and create new possibilities for ourselves. At any point in time, we have the right and the ability to change the course that our lives are on. If we have stumbled onto a path we don’t like, we get to change it- no one can change it for us. Another idea of Sartre’s that I believe is his idea of an ‘authentic self’ that we create. Not having authenticity is bad faith because we are not accurately and truly representing ourselves. We live an authentic life by living the lives we imagine and want for ourselves, regardless of what those around us say or think. We answer to ourselves and we are responsible for ourselves- our actions are ours and so are the consequences.
ReplyDeleteI find the Confucius theory of human nature to be the most persuasive. Confucianism takes a positive, and optimistic outlook on human nature. This way of thinking focuses on how incredible the human race is and can be. Confucian believed that humans were highly teachable, improvable, and perfectible. While everyone is capable of becoming a wise sage, Confucian is aware that some do not and he thinks this has to do with humans ability to freely chose between what is right and what is wrong. The main education that comes into play when making that choice comes from the environment what one lives in and it ability to shape us as human beings. Ultimately Confucian says that the result of being moral and benevolent is joy. I think this one is the most persuasive because for one I already agree with most of it when pertaining to human nature and two I think it is still applicable and relevant today.
ReplyDelete