Men cannot shrug and say, "we are weak." We must take full responsibility for our actions without such an excuse to fall back on. For, man is not inherently weak. The presumption that "man is weak" strengthens the conviction that we are inherently weak and therefore may as well resign ourselves to failure. No, man is instead usually disloyal to his own values. Men lose sight of their own values by not thinking through the reasons for or implications of their (individual or collective) actions. The are not paying attention to themselves - they are distracted by their own contingencies. Each act of the will must properly harmonize with the overall values of the individual, or that individual will betray his own values, and therefore everyone else with whom he is in social contract, directly or indirectly . . . One must be aware of what one's values are, and also what one is doing when he makes choices, at every possible conscious moment.
-- Erik D. France, journal, August 2, 1984, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Folks, I feel the same now as I did then -- a quarter century later. Tweak the language to make it gender neutral, and it still stands. Seems to me the existentialist ethos has not been refuted, just partly forgotten and replaced by . . . nothing. We are free to act or not act, and we are responsible for ourselves within the context of our life situations.
Today's Rune: Fertility.
6 comments:
How does the concept of original sin fit in with a person's essential weakness?--Cardinal Spelling
Dear Cardinal Spelling,
thanks for your q. Raises a good point -- existentialism can work with religion. For example, pulled this from "Catholic Answers:"
"Kierkegaard didn't think existentialism conflicted with Christianity. I suppose it depends upon what brand and aspect of existentialism you are looking at. Creating oneself seems to be not only possible but necessary if we take free will seriously - whether we choose for or against God."
Too deep, even if I have considered original sin before, didn't look at it the same way - rather than a weakness, it was just independence, using the ability that a person has and then naturally, God can fade away and let the person live.
I do like how you state this thing you "know for sure" - an Oprahism.
Erik, this old cheerleader still says, "ya gotta be true to your school!" Right on!
I hate to admit it, but I've had to bury my values deep...at least for the time being. Perhaps when I have just a few breaths left in me I'll make one mutha of a statement.
There's a great speech Camus gave after the war that I came across in a City Lights publication an artist who had lived in the apartment my family lived in then-hip Lincoln Park in the early sixties. It was entitled "The Artist As Witness of Freedom." He makes a lot of the same points you made in your journal entry, pointing out that even inaction is an action in the face of oppression. I think I transcribed it a few years back; if I can find it, I'll post it on my blog.
Post a Comment