The Burden of Freedom
by
Rosasophia, IV,
The
most fundamental doctrine of existentialism is that existence precedes essence.
That being is man or, according to Heidegger, the human reality. There is no abstract nature that one is
destined to fill. Our destinies are entirely in our own hands. Being human just
means having the capacity to create one's own essence in time. Man first of all exists,
encounters himself, surges up in the world - and defines himself
afterwards. We are not anything until we
make ourselves into something. We are
undefined until we define ourselves. (Kaufman, 1989, ¶ 10)
The most fundamental doctrine of existentialism is
the claim that existence precedes essence. That being is man or,
according to Heidegger, the human reality. There is no abstract nature that one is destined to
fill. Instead, each of us simply is in the world; what we will be is then entirely up to us. Being
human just means having the capacity to create one's own essence in time. What do we mean by saying
that existence precedes essence? “We mean that man first of all exists,
encounters himself, surges up in the world - and defines himself afterwards. If
man as the existentialist sees him as not definable, it is because to begin
with he is nothing. He will not be anything until later, and then he will be
what he makes of himself. (Kaufman, 1989, ¶ 10)
To will is
the human capacity to act (or not to act) as we choose or prefer, without any
external compulsion or restraint. Freedom in this sense is usually regarded as
a presupposition of moral responsibility: the
actions for which I may be praised or blamed, rewarded or punished, are just
those which I perform freely. The further question of whether choice—the
volition or will to act—is itself free or subject to ordinary causality raises
the issue of determinism in human conduct. But most modern
philosophers have held that (internal) determination of the will by desire or
impulse does not diminish the relevant sense of moral responsibility.
Man is nothing but that which he makes of
himself. That is the first principle of existentialism, which is called
“subjectivity”. Man is, before all else,
“something which propels itself towards the future and is aware that it is
doing so. (¶ 10)” Before that projection of the self nothing exists. What we usually understand by wishing or
willing is most often a conscious decision taken after we have made ourselves
what we are. “I may wish to join a party, to write a book or to marry — but in
such a case what is usually called my will is probably a manifestation of a
prior and more spontaneous decision. If, however, it is true that existence is
prior to essence, man is responsible for what he is (¶10)”. The first effect of
existentialism, therefore, is to put each individual in possession of his as he
is, placing the entire responsibility of his existence squarely upon his own shoulders. But
accepting such total responsibility entails a profound awareness of one’s
responsibility not only to oneself but to one’s fellows. No choice that I make for myself affects me
alone. Choices that I deem to be good
for myself are not good only for myself but
good for humanitiy at large. Sartre
maintained that only this account does justice to the fundamental dignity and
value of human life. Since all of us share in the same situation, we must
embrace our awesome freedom, deliberately rejecting any (false) promise of
authoritative moral determination. Even when we choose to seek or accept advice
about what to do, we remain ourselves responsible for choosing which advice to
accept. This doesn't mean that I can do whatever I want. Free choice is never
exercised capriciously. (Kemerling, 2002)
Moral development includes a concern for others, a sense of justice,
trust-worthiness, and self-control. It
requires the complex interweaving of three elements – emotions, cognition, and
behaviors, which do not always work together in perfect harmony. (Broderick & Blewitt,
2003, p. 244) According to Piaget before
the age of 5 children were premoral in the sense that
they seemed unconcerned about established rules and standards, making up their
own as they went along. (Broderick & Blewitt,
2003, p. 244) Around the age of 5
children then entered what Piaget called the heteronomous
stage. In this stage children regard
rules as immutable. They see authority
as existing outside of themselves and judge things concretely, by the letter of
the law. They also believe in immanent
justice meaning that even unseen trespasses will be punished by some invisible
authority. (Broderick & Blewitt, 2003, p. 244) Piaget asserts that heteronomous
understanding comes from early experience with parents and other authority
figures. (Broderick & Blewitt, 2003, p. 244)
As children enter middle school and relationships become more equal
views on morality evolve to a more autonomous perspective as well. Children begin to understand that rules are
based on social contracts and that they can be changed. (Broderick & Blewitt, 2003, p. 244)
With development in perspective taking they are now also able to
negotiate, make compromises, and understand that social dictates promote the
greater good and social justice.
Kohlberg expanded moral development theory in adolescence and
adulthood. Kohlberg also took his
analysis beyond the everyday and introduced situations that raised broad
philosophical questions.
Empathy is an
important milestone in social cognition. Sensitive care and emotional support
with effective discipline at home are important keys to helping children
develop a positive sense of self and a positive model for interaction with
others. "Interestingly, moral reasoning, which is likely to be benefited
by interaction with peers, tends to be more advanced in popular children with
good social skills, at least for boys" (Broderick & Blewitt, 2003, p. 252). Boys who are aggressive and have
poor self-control, both of which are common in children with insecure
attachments, have poor peer relations. (Broderick & Blewitt,
2003, p. 252) Children who have parents who are prosocial
are more likely to become prosocial themselves.
Additionally children who are given plenty of opportunities to engage in prosocial behavior seem to engage in more of such
activities. (Broderick & Blewitt, 2003, p. 253)
Children who have parents who are prosocial are more
likely to become prosocial themselves.
Making a
moral decision is an act of creation, like the creation of a work of art;
nothing about it is predetermined, so its value lies wholly within itself. Nor
does this mean that it is impossible to make mistakes.”Although there can be no
objective failure to meet external standards, an individual human being can
choose badly. When that happens, it is not that I have betrayed my abstract
essence, but rather that I have failed to keep faith with myself (Kemerling,
2002, ¶ 6).”
Sartre
thoroughly expounded his notion of the self-negation of freedom in l'Être
et le néant (Being and Nothingness) (1943). Since the
central feature of human existence is the capacity to choose in full awareness
of one's own non-being, it follows that the basic question is always whether or
not I will be true to myself. Self-deception
invariably involves an attempt to evade responsibility for myself. (¶ 7) This
may be done as saying “my subconscious desires caused it” or it “came from my unconscience mind”. Much like the religious person’s “the devil
made me do it” it is a way of making a part of ourselves “other” thereby
freeing ourselves of the responsibility and blame.
Sartre offered practical examples of mauvaise foi (bad
faith) in action. Focusing
exclusively on what-we-might-become is a handy (though self-deceptive) way of
overlooking the truth about what-we-are. Similarly, servers who extravagantly
"play at" performing their roles illustrate the tendency to embrace
an externally-determined essence, an artificial expectation about what we
ought-to-be. But once again, of course, the cost is losing what we uniquely are
in fact. The ability to accept ourselves for what we are—without
exaggeration—is the key, since the chief value of human life is fidelity to our
selves, sincerity in the most profound sense. In our relationships with other
human beings, what we truly are is all that counts, yet it is precisely here
that we most often betray ourselves by trying to be whatever the other person
expects us to be. (Kemerling,
2002)
Andre Malraux,
the French novelist, described a country priest who had taken confession for
many decades and summed up what he had learned about human nature in this
manner: “First of all, people are much more unhappy
than one thinks ... and there is no such thing as a grown-up person (Yalom,
2000, ¶30).” Everyone, and that means therapists as well as
patients, is destined to experience not only the exhilaration of life, but its
inevitable darkness as well: painful choices, disillusionment, aging, illness,
isolation, loss, meaninglessness, and death.
No one put things more starkly and more
bleakly than Schopenhauer:
“In early youth” Schopenhauer says, “as we contemplate our coming life, we
are like children in a theater before the curtain is raised, sitting there in
high spirits and eagerly waiting for the play to begin. It is a blessing that
we do not know what is really going to happen. Could we foresee it, there are
times when children might seem like condemned prisoners, condemned, not to
death, but to life, and as yet all unconscious of what their sentence means.”
(Yalom,
2000, ¶30)
The problem of life meaning plagues all
self-reflective beings. One of our major life tasks is to invent a purpose in
life sturdy enough to support a life. And then next we have to perform the
tricky maneuver of subsequently denying personal authorship of this purpose so
as to conclude that we discovered it hat it was out there waiting for us. Our
ongoing search for substantial purpose in life systems often throws us into a
crisis. Jung estimated that one third of his patients consulted him for that
reason. (¶ 37)
Though Schopenhauer’s view is colored
heavily by his own personal unhappiness, it is difficult to deny the inbuilt
despair in the life of every self-conscious, free-thinking individual. At some point we must all come to face with
not only the hard questions of life, but with ourselves.
Michel Foucault writes:
Freedom of conscience entails more dangers than authority and
despotism. “Religious sentiments…exist
without restriction; every individual is entitled to preach to anyone who will
listen to him,” and by listening to such different opinions, “minds are disturbed
in the search for truth.” Dangers of
indecision, of an irresolute attention, a vacillating soul! The danger too, of disputes, of passions, of obstinancy:
“Everything meets opposition, and opposition excites feelings; in
religion, in politics, in science, as in everything, each man is permitted to
form an opinion; but he must to meet with opposition.” Nor does so much liberty permit a man to
master time; every man is left to his own uncertainly, and the State abandons
all to their fluctuations.” (Foucualt, 1988, p. 213)
Foucault acknowledges that
our burden of existential freedom is made all the more dangerous because our
artificial society has kept us separated from our true natures. Most people are distracted by the pressures
of modern society, bombarded daily with advertising to buy more, pressured by
parents and peers to conform to their ideas of success, mesmerized by the
popular media’s glamourous often tawdry lifestyles,
admonished to live an upright life of middle class morality, but fed violence,
lies, and every form of abuse. At every turn the world pulls us in every
direction and none of them lead to where we need to
be…within our own essential natures.
“The English are a nation of merchants; a
mind always occupied with speculations is continually agitated by fear and
hope. Egoism, the soul of commerce,
easily becomes envious and summons other faculties to his aid.” Besides, this liberty is far from true natural
liberty: on all sides it is constrained
and harried by demands opposed to the most legitimate desires of
individuals: this is the liberty of
interests, of coalitions, of financial combinations, not of man, not of minds
and hearts. (Foucualt, 1988, p. 214)
Only a reflective life lived in balance
with nature herself, a life of disciple coupled with the natural joys the come
with the love innate to us; only thus can we take on the mantle of freedom in
safety. Even then it is a mighty burden
of power, but one worthy of a King. The
slaves shall serve. “In short, liberty,
far from putting man in possession of himself, ceaselessly alienates him from
his essence and his world; it fascinates in the absolute exteriority of other
people and of money, in the irreversible interiority of passion and unfulfilled
desire. Between man and a nature in
which he finds truth, the liberty of the mercantile state is “milieu”: and to
this very degree it is the determining element of madness. (214)”
Existential psychotherapy posits that the inner conflict bedeviling us
is a product not only of our struggle with suppressed instincts or internalized
significant adults or fragments of forgotten traumatic memories, but also from
our confrontation with the “givens” of existence. (Yalom,
2000, ¶ 21) And what are these givens of existence? Once we screen
out or set aside the everyday concerns of life and reflect deeply upon our situation
in the world, we inevitably arrive at the ultimate concerns of life. The
four ultimate concerns according to existential theory are: death, isolation,
meaning in life, and freedom. (¶32 ) Existential
psychotherapy is a dynamic therapy which, like other psychoanalytic therapies,
assumes the presence of unconscious forces which affect the conscious mind. It
parts company from the other psychoanalytic theories when we ask the next
question: what is the nature of the conflicting internal forces? (¶ 22) Like Gnosticism existentialism places
responsibility for salvation upon the individual himself and acknowledges the
individual as an ever-changing combination of forces which must continually
compete for supremacy until they find a working balance that is in harmony with
the individual’s circumstances in life.
The individual must work to either change his circumstances to match his
changing internal forces or change his or her internal forces to match the
ever-changing (albeit sometimes maddeningly slow) changing external world. In no case is either the external or the
internal world stagnant nor is anyone or anything responsible for the happiness
and fulfillment of the individual but the individual his or herself. It is a maddeningly harsh reality, but in it
are the seeds of the greatest joy and freedom.
Logotherapy is an existential
psychotherapy which is extremely helpful for treating patients with mental
health problems. One of the main principles of logotherapy
is self-transcendence. Self-transcendence is the human ability to extend one's
focus beyond the self to focus on, or act for, another person or cause. It is a
pathway to an enhanced sense of purpose which in turn increases sense of
well-being and an increased ability to cope with suffering. (Schulenberg, S. E.; Elliott, T. L.; Kaster,
J. T., 2003) Logotherapy is existentialist because it emphasises freedom
of the will and the resultant responsibility. It also emphasizes the importance
of the meaning of life. While Freud asserted a human will to pleasure
and Adler asserted a will to power, Victor Frankl
maintains that humans have a will to meaning. If it is frustrated,
spiritual (noogenic) neuroses result. Frankl believed that ultimate meaning does exist and that
it is unique for every individual and each situation. Every moment in every
life is the result of a unique culmination of events the meaning of which must
be ascertained by the individual in question. Meaning cannot be invented but
must be discovered.
What does Existential therapy look like in
practice? To answer that question one must attend to both content and process
the two major aspects of therapy discourse. “Content” of course is just what it
says the precise words spoken, the substantive issues addressed. “Process”
refers to an entirely different and enormously important dimension: the
interpersonal relationship between the patient and therapist. When we ask
about the ‘process’ of an interaction, we mean: what do the words (and the
nonverbal behavior as well) tell us about the nature of the relationship
between the parties engaged in the interaction? (¶23)
Irvin Yalom
writes, “If my own therapy sessions were observed, one might often look in vain
for lengthy explicit discussions of death, freedom, meaning, or existential
isolation. Such existential content may only be salient for some
patients (but not all patients) at some stages (but not all stages) of therapy.
In fact, the effective therapist should never try to force discussion of any
content area: therapy should not be theory-driven but relationship-driven.”
(¶ 25)
Observe these same sessions for some
characteristic process deriving from an existential orientation and
one will discover another story entirely. A heightened sensibility to
existential issues deeply influences the nature of the relationship of the
therapist and patient and affects every single therapy session. (¶26)
The consequences of human
responsibility: anguish over the decision, abandonment in making it alone, and
despair when it backfires are the buden of freedom. What man needs is to find himself again and to understand that
nothing can save him from himself, not even a valid proof of the existence of
God. In this sense existentialism is optimistic. It is a doctrine of
action. “Man is all the time outside of
himself: it is in projecting and losing himself beyond himself that he makes
man to exist; and, on the other hand, it is by pursuing transcendent aims that
he himself is able to exist. Since man is thus self-surpassing, and can grasp
objects only in relation to his self-surpassing, he is himself the heart and
center of his transcendence (Kaufman, 1989, ¶34)”. We remind man that there is no legislator but
himself; that he himself, thus abandoned, must decide for himself; also because
we show that it is not by turning back upon himself, but always by seeking,
beyond himself, an aim which is one of liberation or of some particular
realization, that man can realize himself as truly human. (¶34)
Nietzsche wrote, “It is not the courage
of one’s convictions that matters but the courage to change one’s convictions”.
It is sad
to think how many people waste precious hours of their lives in
bondage to obsessive-compulsive behavior, or excessive preoccupation with
acquisition or ritualistic practice. What is lost is some part of human
freedom, creativity and growth. In his
four noble truths the Buddha taught that life is suffering, that suffering
originates from craving and attachment, and that suffering can be eliminated by
detachment from craving through meditative practice. Schopenhauer took a
similar position that the will is insatiable and that as soon as one impulse is
satisfied we enjoy only a moment of satiation which is instantly replaced by
boredom until another desire seizes us.
It is not the will that is insatiable, but the undisciplined and
misappropriation of the will which leaves one dissatisfied and wanting more. The will is being saturated by the whims of
lower desires and denied the thing it truly needs. Most of us prefer a Nietzschian life-celebratory, life engagement, amor fati (love
your fate) perspective to the pessimism of Schopenhauer. (¶75) Yalom’s work with individuals facing death taught him that
death anxiety is directly proportional to the amount of each person’s “unlived
life.” “Those individuals, who feel they have lived their lives richly, have
fulfilled their potential and their destiny, experience less panic in face of
death. (¶75)”
James Crumbaugh,
co-inventor of the Purpose in Life test, has devised a number of exercises he
gives to clients to help orientate them towards meaning and values. The idea is
also to work out the underlying values and how you might fulfil them, in order
to lead a more meaningful life. “Crumbaugh
and Maholick's (1964; Crumbaugh,
1968) Purpose in Life (PIL) test was designed to operationalize
Frankl's ideas and to measure an individual's
experience of meaning and purpose in life. It is a 20-item scale that has been
shown to have good reliability (split-half and test-retest reliability is
reported in Zika & Chamberlain (1992). (John, D.
and MacArthur, C. T.1997).” In Seeman
[1991] from the work of others; the PIL had an alpha of .91 in their study. Each
item is rated on a 7-point scale and total scores therefore range from 20 (low
purpose) to 140 (high purpose). (John, D. and MacArthur,
C. T.1997). Crumbaugh has also devised 6
lists that are used throughout analysis. Research Network on Socioeconomic Status and Health
1. Life-long aims, ambitions, goals and interests
going back as far as the client can remember, including those s/he no longer
considers important.
2. The strong points of personality, physical and
environmental circumstances, "good luck".
3. The weak points of personality, failures, "bad
luck".
4. Specific problems that cause the client's
conflicts.
5. Future hopes (this list may overlap with the first
list above but emphasises the future whilst list 1 includes past ambitions).
6. Future plans, immediate and long-range.
References:
Foucault, Michel.(1988). Madness and Civilisation.
Vintage Books:
John,
D. and MacArthur, Catherine T. (1997). “Purpose of Life”.
Research Network on
Socioeconomic Status and Health. Retrieved
Kaufman, Walter, ed. (1989). Existentialism from Dostoyevsky to Sartre,
Publishing
Company. Translated by: Philip Mairet; HTML Markup: Andy Blunden. Retrieved
Kemerling, Garth. (2002). Jean-Paul
Sartre. Retrieved Dec. 29, 2004 from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/7e.htm
Schulenberg, S.
E.; Elliott, T. L.; Kaster, J. T., (2003). “Logotherapy and
mental health professionals:
Transcending histories of personal trauma?”
|
|
International Forum
for Logotherapy. 26(2), Fal 2003, 102-109.
Retrieved |
Yalom, Irvin. (2000). “Religion and Psychiatry”. American Journal of Psychotherapy (number three). Retrieved
