Something you should know about me, I have read a comic or two in my day. And not to be cliche, but I'm a firm believer in "with great power comes great responsibility". Now you might be saying to yourself, why does this matter? How is this relevant? Well, Peter Parker wasn't truly Spider-Man the second he was bitten by that radioactive spider on that fateful day. No, he wasn't. But he did EXIST as Spider-Man, he just lacked the essence of the man he would need to become to be Spider-Man, or the ESSENCE of Spider-Man if you will.
David Banach proposes two contradictory arguments to what comes first, existence or essence, providing no definitive proof of either one, instead leaving it up to oneself to determine which they believe in for themselves. The two arguments are both well presented though, and determining one that you believe in takes a lot of self-analyzation. Like a scissor "which has been made by an artisan whose inspiration came from a concept [Quoted from Sartre], Banach proposes that things have a purpose that comes before they exist, so for this case the scissors are meant to cut paper and are created to do that. Banach later compares that "the artisan in the case of Humans is God." I feel like this does apply to an extent, but while scissors are not sentient and are intended to be controlled and used for a purpose, humans are free of such constrictions and can do as they please. The idea that we have every move planned for us and every detail of life is already set out for us makes life seem no more important or significant than a movie, and that scares me and I can't believe that our entire existence as an organism is for a purpose such as that.
The second possibility for the relationship between essence and existence is that existence comes first and then essence. That "man exists, turns up, appears on the scene, and, only afterwards, defines himself". Essentially this is stating that everybody has the chance to be who they want to be and that nobody has a straight path set before them. This is much more comforting to me, because it shows that people can be who they want, that nothing is impossible. I feel as if this is the "American Dream" of views on life. This one is much more comforting to me, because like I said before, knowing that my life is laid out before me is very scary to me, I need to know that I have the freedom to be who I want. It's almost like the kid who comes from a family where everybody is a farmer and wants to be an artist. According to Banach's 'essence comes first' theory, he would have to be another farmer, his path is set for him. However with the latter theory of existence first, he can choose to be an artist and live his life as he sees fit, not according to some higher power.
I feel like somewhere in there is the true nature of people. I don't think that either theory can be proved, it's just a matter of what sounds correct to the individual and what helps to keep them sane concerning life. For me, my sanity dictates that I have the freedom to be who I want and that I choose my essence, it is not stamped on me from birth.
And if it is stamped on me from birth, I'm sure I could find somebody that could remove it from me so I can just be me.
Dear Henry,
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you used Spider-Man as a metaphor for the ideas in Banach’s lecture. The way you convey your ideas is sophisticated, yet easy to follow. You are interjecting your personal beliefs, but not limiting the ideologies of others. There is a certain balance in your writing that attracts the minds of others, reels them in and does not phrase anything in a way that could lose potential readers. There is usage of ruminative, earnest and heartfelt tones, which really makes your writing more appealing to the reader. You also don’t leave any stone unturned, by just focusing on a few core ideas and elaborating on those. Within the entry, you discussed the incongruent beliefs of either existence prevailing before essence or essence coming before existence discussed within Banach’s lecture. Then you admitted that the theory that existence must be formed before essence could come into play was more reassuring, yet you ultimately believed that both theories could be proven. The acceptance of both existence philosophies in your entry can be contrasted with creationism where many a time you view existence in only a certain light and do not accept other’s beliefs, just philosophically cutting down the people around you. Whereas, in your belief system, one can view everyone in a compliant way that leads to a sound and a more united environment for everyone. There is not a lot that you should change in your entry, just make sure that you cite Banach in whatever you have in quotations and perhaps enhance your final argument by adding another reason you feel the way you do. Your entry really relates to the course by taking the arguments presented in the lecture in your own words and forming a response from the mind of your individual existence first and foremost. Your post makes me realize how we should all be a little more accepting to how others around us think, show more compassion and really try to relate to one another. I hope that you never alter the way that you view the world because it is truly indicative of your own style and it adds a much-needed depth to the human world.
All the best,
Hayley