What is your understanding of Plato and Aristotle’s belief that reason is the core essence of human beings?
Order Instructions
The purpose of this discussion assignment is to reflect upon your understanding of the two main philosophical approaches to the self. After completing your readings, write a 1-2 page paper comparing and contrasting the avocado/modernist idea of the self with the artichoke/postmodern view.
As you develop your response, you might find some of the following questions to be relevant:
What is the avocado idea of the self? What is your understanding of Plato and Aristotle’s belief that reason is the core essence of human beings?
What is the artichoke idea of the self? What is your understanding of the existential idea that our existence determines our essence?
What do you make of the concern that the avocado idea of the self values reason over emotion? What are the implications of this view for women?
Are you an avocado or an artichoke? Or do you find the non-Western views of the self to be more compelling?
Textbook:
Mitchell, H. B. (2019). Roots of wisdom: A tapestry of philosophical traditions (8th ed.)
Who am I? Two Perspectives on the Self
Do human beings have a fixed/essential nature? Some argue that we do, and that this is evident in the characteristics that we believe distinguish us from other living beings, such as reason, language, morality, and toolmaking. However, some animals share these characteristics. Furthermore, computers are able to engage in rational activities as well. Nevertheless, there are some philosophers who argue that human beings have a fixed, essential nature that makes us unique. This can be described as the avocado view of human nature. The essential part of human beings, the part that makes us more like other human beings than like animals, is the avocado seed, and the flesh and outer skin are simply incidental.
Both the Judeo-Christian and Islamic religious traditions set forth a version of the self that is consistent with the avocado view, as do Greek rationalism and modernist/Enlightenment western philosophy. The belief in a soul and the privileging of reason over emotion is generally associated with the avocado view. While this view is appealing, it also admits of some problematic aspects, one of the most serious of which is the association of the avocado’s “core,” i.e. reason, with masculinity, and of emotions and the body with femininity. On the other hand, some disagree that human beings have an essential nature. This is the artichoke view. Upbringing, genetics, culture, particular experiences, and even sheer luck determine who we are. In the artichoke view there are no uniquely human characteristics such as reason or a soul, merely a series of layers. Thus, the self is better thought of as a work-in-progress. This is the view that is generally consistent with the postmodern/protean view of the self, as we will see when we examine existentialism.
Additional Materials
From your textbook, Roots of Wisdom: A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions, read the following:
Human Nature. Who or What Are We, and What Are We Doing Here?
Who am I? The Artichoke View: Existentialism
The avocado view is based upon the idea that human nature is characterized by a fixed essence such as reason. One way of expressing this view is to say that our essence determines our existence. On the other hand, existentialists like Jean Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir argue that existence determines essence. In other words, human beings create their essence through their actions. Our ability to be self-creating is also ambiguous, however, because we are also embodied, intersubjective, historical beings. Thus, humans are both self-determining (like God) and determined by forces beyond their control such as other people, physical reality, and so on. These forces are known as facticity. For example, I may be free to be a philosophy professor or a yoga instructor, but I cannot be the King of France in the 17th century or a cat because of the specific temporal and physical situation in which I find myself. This ambiguous freedom causes humans to experience their freedom with a kind of anguish/anxiety. Sartre and Beauvoir explain this ambiguity in terms of a human being as both a being-in-itself and a being-for-itself. A Being in-itself is a thing that is not free and cannot determine its essence, like a tea cup or a fruit fly. Being for-itself is free and self-determining, like our idea of how God might be (if such a being exists). The intentionality of consciousness is unambiguous, rooted in the unambiguous desire to synthesize our freedom to be self-determining with the limits placed on our freedom by our facticity. However, our attempts to be completely self-creating like a God are in “bad faith” because they ignore our facticity. Similarly, we are also in bad faith if we pretend to have no control over our destiny at all.
What is Real, Part II: Does God Exist?
Religion can be understood as a collection of doctrines and beliefs about God. We know that these systems of belief take a number of different forms that are both remarkably similar and have key differences. Philosophy encourages us to think about the source of our beliefs (including religious belief) and to consider whether the reasons one cites for a given position would be persuasive to someone with different beliefs. The study of various religions (i.e., the philosophy of religion) is different from the practice of those religions. A philosophical study of the world’s religions might lead to the conclusion that there is quite a bit of common ground between religions. This is known as religious pluralism, or the belief that the true nature of God does not rest within any one religion in particular. Some theologians who share the avocado view attempt to provide rational arguments for the existence of God. While the reason-based arguments for God may provide some persuasive reasons for believing in a divine creator by answering the question of how the world came into being, they all fail to provide any logical justification for any particular set of religious beliefs. In a world that increasingly emphasizes rational proofs and scientific evidence over faith, God may no longer play a necessary role. Yet not all of those who take the artichoke view reject the idea of God. For example, the 19-century Danish existentialist Soren Kierkegaard argued that the belief in God is not a rational conclusion but requires a leap of faith. Kierkegaard’s account has two implications: (1) that God may indeed be omnipotent, omniscient, and perfect but, also (2) because human belief in God is a matter of faith rather than reason, we can never share in this divine knowledge, power, and perfection.
From your textbook, Roots of Wisdom: A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions, read the following:
Philosophy and Ultimate Reality. Is There an Ultimate Reality?
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
