Rereading for a Better Understanding of Self
Well I have finally finished
reading the introduction for the third time this week and I am still a little
unsure of what to write about. The fact that this is my first blog ever and I’m
not exactly sure if I am following the blog structure correctly may have
something to do with my difficulty of transferring my thoughts onto this post. I
hope those who read this post won’t judge me too harshly for the content I
display because I am still trying to figure this out.
I felt
that the introduction left me at a bit of a cliff hanger. As Robert Soloman
went on trying to express the idea of existentialism he cited a handful of
great philosophers who each said their piece about the topic. This was
frustrating to me because I was searching for a definition amongst his pages,
but was left with only an idea of what existentialism is like. My search for a
definition came to an end when Robert Soloman stated at the end of the
introduction “One might object that this sketch of the existential attitude and
its philosophical expression has failed to give a definition of existentialism.
But existentialism is not a dead doctrine to be bottled and labeled.” (xix
Robert Soloman). It was because of my uncertainty about the subject which led
me to read the introduction again and then again once more.
The
philosophers listed in the book are stating that existentialism is a way in
which we see ourselves. The video camera examples appealed to me the most
because it helped me better understand existentialism. We are as we think other
people see us this is why the conscious is better than the self-conscious. It
is the things that are going on around us that give our life meaning. If I were
to succumb to my self-conscious only with no attention to my outer being how
would I be able to put value on myself? It is the outer being that helps me
understand the kind of life I am leading. The way I act in front of others
causes me to think about how others are seeing me. Every day we are constantly
thinking about what others are thinking about us. When we walk down the street
and the passerby makes a glance up at you, you begin to question in your mind
what that person may have been interested in about yourself. It’s this thought
process that causes us to change in order to correct what may have gotten the passerby’s
attention. It could be a bad thing which causes us to smell our armpit or
possibly a good thing like the passerby may have been checking you out which
may cause you to act with more confidence.
I am
confused with what the philosophers are saying about self consciousness, they
say it is wrong because it hastens our moral judgment and can rob us of our
principles. I believe that our self conscious can lead us to make decisions for
the good of others and in a moral and highly principled way just as easy as it
can lead us to the other.
I hope my
understanding of the topic is not too far off from what Robert Soloman was
trying to explain. I believe with further reading of this book that I will
arrive at a better understanding of what Existentialism is about. As for my
blog post I really hope I completed it in the proper fashion. I believe that
with good and hopefully not too bad of feedback that my blogging skills will improve
over these weeks to come.
Posted September 2 by
Brendan McInerney
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBrendan,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your blog. When I was reading the Introduction section, I too was confused initially about what Existentialism "is". As I read further, however, I began to realize that it is not definable, and that excited me. I love topics and situations that allow for interpretation. I personally have a wide imagination and am always thinking about "what if" scenarios, alternate solutions, and just generally trying to see everything from all sides. Things in this world, whether they be concrete or abstract, that are multi-faceted and undefinable are incredibly interesting. With that being said, I am looking forward to the rest of this semester and learning more about this topic.
Your section on the “self-conscious” also had me thinking, for I too was a bit confused when I read it. I re-read that section in particular at least twice, and here’s my conclusion: Soloman is saying that we can be easily swayed by our feelings, and that to one who is not self-conscious, or inherently aware of one’s self, those feelings can lead to actions; actions that could be harmful or helpful, but either way you are taking a chance and almost acting on impulse. To someone who is self-conscious, they already know themselves; at least enough to the point where they can detach from their emotions and feelings and realize what they are feeling can be separate from the outside world. Feelings become information to be analyzed carefully and then, possibly, proceed to action. The self-conscious person is not defined by their emotions and feelings. Rather, they use feelings to further justify their moral code that they have already established for themselves; like a personal set of commandments.
Hopefully I am not too far off as well. Basically I just understood that to be self-conscious is not a bad thing, and those who are not self-conscious simply look to the external for answers and have yet to look inward to find the answers to their questions.
Bria