Although on the surface this seems like a pointless inspirational quote, it has a very good philosophical foundation. As social beings, we are naturally influenced by our surroundings. That much is unavoidable. But to what degree should we be influenced is the question raised. Although Freud allows our ego to be shaped by societal expectations, but he looks for dynamic tension rather that a one-sided response. In terms of freedom, some soft determinists think that if a desire is not truly our own, then our actions would not be free, hence we are for all intents and purposes a prisoner. This compatibilist view applies completely to this prompt because once we start to listen to others and base our actions on them, the desires are not truly our own.
Perhaps an argument could be made that we are always free and even if we listen to others we make the choice to change freely. But, if one holds that view, one must ask themselves if they wanted to, would they change back. If you feel that it fancies you, you would change back to the way things were or change into a completely new style, you are free. But if you fear being judged, then to some degree you are being coerced into your decision and hence it is not your decision at all.
I found that the statement made in this image strongly resembled an existentialist view on the topic of freedom. We are often quick to identify the compulsion to conform with society as a necessary and inexorable premise for all the decisions we make, but in doing so we are simply shying away from our inherent freedom. In existentialist terms this would be defined as the attempt to (wrongly) label the judgement of society as an aspect of your facticity, and thus living in bad faith. Ultimately, the message being conveyed in this quote is that the influence of societal pressure is nothing more than a voluntary imprisonment that we are perfectly capable of transcending, and by choosing not to do so we are simply being complicit and have no one to blame but ourselves. This ties in nicely with Sartre's idea of abandonment, by which he means that you as the individual agent are solely responsible for getting yourself through life and, in his own (frequently quoted) words, are "condemned to be free."
On a more personal note, I find this perspective understandable but not entirely indisputable. While I believe that it is extremely important to acknowledge the extent to which we care about how we are externally perceived, such awareness can seldom result in the ability to act in spite of consequential social judgement. Aspects of what certain philosophers have theorised on the topic of human nature (such as the idea that we are social beings) are, in my opinion, real and significant enough to be considered genuine limitations on the freedom we have to make decisions.
Although on the surface this seems like a pointless inspirational quote, it has a very good philosophical foundation. As social beings, we are naturally influenced by our surroundings. That much is unavoidable. But to what degree should we be influenced is the question raised. Although Freud allows our ego to be shaped by societal expectations, but he looks for dynamic tension rather that a one-sided response. In terms of freedom, some soft determinists think that if a desire is not truly our own, then our actions would not be free, hence we are for all intents and purposes a prisoner. This compatibilist view applies completely to this prompt because once we start to listen to others and base our actions on them, the desires are not truly our own.
ReplyDeletePerhaps an argument could be made that we are always free and even if we listen to others we make the choice to change freely. But, if one holds that view, one must ask themselves if they wanted to, would they change back. If you feel that it fancies you, you would change back to the way things were or change into a completely new style, you are free. But if you fear being judged, then to some degree you are being coerced into your decision and hence it is not your decision at all.
I found that the statement made in this image strongly resembled an existentialist view on the topic of freedom. We are often quick to identify the compulsion to conform with society as a necessary and inexorable premise for all the decisions we make, but in doing so we are simply shying away from our inherent freedom. In existentialist terms this would be defined as the attempt to (wrongly) label the judgement of society as an aspect of your facticity, and thus living in bad faith. Ultimately, the message being conveyed in this quote is that the influence of societal pressure is nothing more than a voluntary imprisonment that we are perfectly capable of transcending, and by choosing not to do so we are simply being complicit and have no one to blame but ourselves. This ties in nicely with Sartre's idea of abandonment, by which he means that you as the individual agent are solely responsible for getting yourself through life and, in his own (frequently quoted) words, are "condemned to be free."
ReplyDeleteOn a more personal note, I find this perspective understandable but not entirely indisputable. While I believe that it is extremely important to acknowledge the extent to which we care about how we are externally perceived, such awareness can seldom result in the ability to act in spite of consequential social judgement. Aspects of what certain philosophers have theorised on the topic of human nature (such as the idea that we are social beings) are, in my opinion, real and significant enough to be considered genuine limitations on the freedom we have to make decisions.