philosophy - final questions

8/6/2019 Philosophy - Final Questions

1/5

Philosophy Final Questions

1.

Being-in-itself

The way of being of mere objects (putting out_

The being of the phenomenon, object is equal to phenomenon it shows up to mein conscious experience.

Objects of consciousness as they show up to us in experience

Is-what-it-is

simply is what it is now, lack potentialities and depends on human

expectations, desires structure

Being-for-itself

is what it is not, but is not what it is

way of being of consciousness (first person

- Outside itself - Reflects upon; I am always aware of myself, in also being aware of the

world, but I as a spectator am not what I as observer am. (self-consciousness)

- I am in itself but as for itself, I deny that I am identical to a mere in itself

- Is outside-its-self (elastic)

- absorbed in a world in which it is aware

- steps outside herself taking an external point of view of ones self- we have to exist and understand who we are in terms of our possibilities (in-itself)

2. features that ariseFacticity

- Our presence in the world is outside our choice to control since it

is in virtue of the in-itself being here that I as for-it-self are here at all- Thrownness

- Given its dependance on the in-itself, the for-itself- appears in a

condition, that it has not chosen, with certain constraintsUnjustifiability/Gratuitousness

- The fact that I exist it unjustifiable, gratuitous, contingent. The same goes for my having

been thrown into this situation

- Both throwness and unjustifiability are a result of my in-itself, which is all about luck,totally gratuitous. Nothing has to be or can be justified, it just is.

3.

- Anny realizes that expressions such as hate and love are consciousdecisions of actions based on the for-itself, attempt to project a certain in-

itself, and give off an in-itself- Hate and love as words are characterized as in-itself to give social

meaning and structure to the world, by the for-itself.

4.


2/5

- Types of bad faith

- Facticity and transcendance

- (ask for explanation)

- Being-for-others; my understanding of myself as being in the world as freely constituted

by other subjects

- Being-for-oneself; is my understanding of myself, as a planning projecting subject in theworld freely constituting a world of objects

******existence preceeds essence******

- Past/present: in my past Im an in-itself (fixed) in my present I am a for-itself (a freebeing)

- Can be in bad faith by embracing and identifying only with ones past, avoiding

recognition of ones troubling freedom to become totally different. (when you dont

realize)- Embracing ones present freedom, in total denial of ones past deeds and whatever they

may entail.

5.

- Sincerety is impossible. Attempts at sincereity are in bad faith. *(it is impossible to say Iam selfish because you at any moment can CHOOSE to not be selfish)

- You constitute yourself w. a certain type of object in order to escape it. By showingoneself to be freely able to choose to confess a certain objective attribute demonstrates

the embrace of the for-itself, giving yourself an in-itself characteristic

6. human existence makes bad faith possible. Why and how?-Dual nature of human existence which is as for-itself in / as in-itself;

- Bad Faith is a matter of embracing a half truth; accepting just one side of

it to avoid unpleasant second side-Easy to rest content with a half-truth (^^ about bad faith) because belief is

never full belief/conviction, belief is always self undermining, so we learn

not to push beliefs or as too much from them-Belief is never full conviction, never forced on us by the facts. Is a structure

of the for-itself (mind), its a freely embraced way of viewing the world.

-We take beliefs on freely and they exist because of us.

7.

-Who is the other

- One who is looking at me but that I am not looking at- the source of the alienation of my possibilities for the others they

are probabilities

- the source of the organization of my world; everything presented tome, for me, is reorganized around the others point of view. They are there

for him and for her

-Sartre V. Descartes V. Husserl- The primary experience of the other as another is not an object in

the world, I have to infer an introjected experience into it to acknowledge

its consciousness

-Sartre; the primary experience of the other as another is, as a subject which I


3/5

apprehend after understanding the possibility of me being seen as an

object (through shame or pride) I turn to apprehend the other as a mere

object, only in self defense.-Descartes; all I see is a body, whether there is a mind connected to it (a

person) is more open to doubt. If it is known at all in an inference

-Husserl; I apprehend others body, see that its like mine, and in empathy,introject my types of experience into it, and then I come to see it as

another person.

8-9.

-Being-for-others is a constant fact of human reality

- Even if noone is watching me now I constantly understand that I

can be seen as a certain object by others.- The original idea of god came from the idea that we are always

being watched but cannot what him. God is the other pushed to the

other

- Experiencing the other as a subject in experiencing the other asfree. Thus the other introduces an aspect to the world outside of

my knowledge, outside my control.- What about my constitutions of myself based on the presence of others

- reflective consciousness of myself as one having this consciousness of the

world (I see you and Im conscious that I see you)

- unreflective consciousness of object in the world leading me to see myself asan object seen by the other (I see me, as I see you, seeing me)

- I come to see myself as an object in the world as a particular thing,

freely constituted by the other. This me as an object in the world is alwaysunknowable since it is made by the other, alienating because I dont think

you see me specifically for who I am

8.) Shame is the feeling of being what I am for the other a mere object in the world

-a degraded fixed dependent object, it reveals that I am a being for others

Pride is a reaction to shame because I am accepting my object state but to regaincontrol of the situation by making myself into a good object. Causing the other to see me

as I want them too.

Pride is unstable

- I want a good image of me, however this good image must be freelyassigned by the other to me, hence while I try to manipulate the others I

am doing it so they see me in a positive way. The problem with this is that,

in order to manipulate the other subject I must treat them as an object, andan object can not give me any view of myself, if I allow an object to give

me a view of myself through manipulation, it is revealed that I am being-

for-others9.)

feeling of enslavement come when a very important part of me is out of

my control and in the others hands. I am a subject to a freedom which is

not mine, which can freely pass value judgments on me, and constitute me


4/5

as a particular thing.

-feelings of alienation come when my possibilities are turned into the

probabilities the others have assigned to me. I identify with the me seen bythe other, yet it doesnt seem to really be me. It seems strange and

alienating.

- I am in danger of being freely constituted as a mere object in the world.Usable as an instrument.

10. Dialectic of the look:-Originally, I experience the other as subject through my share @ recognition

of my own object state.

-I recover myself as subject by turning the other into an object (arrogance)

-But this is doomed to failure: I can never turn the they into an object-We perpetually alternate between seeing the other as subject and as object

11. What is anguish?

-(find out)- we all suffer from anguish,

-if you reflect back you consider them as objects: cant affect your present-experience what I am to do as not determined by:

-my past

-external situation

-my motives/character

-aprehended only as objects of conciousnessmere

things in the world, hence ineffective stand

apart from them and consider them-prior decisions/resolutions

-they are objects in the world and subsequently ineffectiveon me they are merely part of mypast separate from my present for-itself

-given our experience of our freedom, in anguish we always experience our

own choices (if we react on them) as arbritrary, gratituous, unjustified,unexplainable, inexcusable

-Because we cant see them as having to be the way given

-external situation, past, motives

and yet we feel ourselves fully responsible for those choices

Most ppl dont feel anguish about most choices, why?

-normally anguish is avoid as long as we act unreflectively

-simply pursuing possiblities rather then reflecting on them aspossibilities so anguish need not arise

-Simply, I see the world as placing demands on me or as providing reasons

for action (but the demands/reasons come from me)-seeing the world unreflectively, through the lens of everyday morality

also makes certain acts show up as obligatory, forbidden, good/evil

-this keeps me from anguish yet all values originate from me-Fear reflects on the feeling of being utilised by others as a mere instrument of their


5/5

philosophy - final questions

Documents