sign in sign up
<<
Home , Existentialism, Fyodor Dostoevsky, Other (philosophy), Relativism

Masthead Logo Akadimia Filosofia

Volume 1 | Issue 1 Article 3

5-2015 Our : in the Age of Fear Michael S. Dauber Fordham University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://fordham.bepress.com/apps Part of the Commons

Recommended Citation Dauber, Michael S. (2015) "Our Time: Existentialism in the Age of Fear," Akadimia Filosofia: Vol. 1 : Iss. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://fordham.bepress.com/apps/vol1/iss1/3

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalResearch@Fordham. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akadimia Filosofia by an authorized editor of DigitalResearch@Fordham. For more , please contact [email protected].

Our Time: Existentialism in the view of human life and that applies to all in our daily routines, leaving us Age of Fear simultaneously with no true roadmap for life Michael S. Dauber while placing the control entirely in our hands by providing the very framework to make the roadmap. Jean-Paul Sartre argued Abstract: This paper focuses on re- that writing should be “engaged” or awakening existentialism from its realm of “committed,” making reference to real philosophical inactivity over the past few issues and problems in an effort to change decades. Existentialism is still very much a the world.1 Philosophy should proceed in the “committed” philosophy, providing us with same way: it should be committed to an approach to life that gives us courage in reshaping the world into a better place and the face of tremendous adversity. Indeed, helping to ease through the this philosophy enables us to focus on what struggles life presents. Existentialism, matters most in our own lives by freeing arguably the most committed philosophy ourselves from the burdens of fear and ever proposed, attempts to do exactly that. unrealistic expectations given to us by those Some historical or cultural narrative who seek to control our futures. Such a that molds the and actions of its conception of modern existentialism people invariably defines every generation. introduces the of existential courage: Historically, existentialist authors have seen what the modern existentialist must this narrative as something to overcome overcome is the fear that results from agents using the power of human . For who wish to take away human . , it was the deficiencies 2 of a classist, austere Russian society . SØren A colleague of mine recently told me Kierkegaard responded to the orderliness of that existentialism has been relatively Hegelian philosophy and rebelled against inactive or irrelevant for so long that it can the notion that should be “easy.”3 largely be considered a historical period. Friederich Nietzsche played to The point was that existentialism was Kierkegaard’s work, encouraging people to “done” or “finished” in the same way that overcome the strictures of that Kant’s or ’s are done: prevented them from enjoying human life there is no more to be made, no and all its various pleasures since more original work to be done, and so many were an illusion in the first place: living counter-arguments have been made that it no ascetically toward some sort of was longer can have any true influence on the a waste of the only one would ever contemporary age. However it seems to me that existentialism is one of the more resilient philosophies to ever have been proposed, renewing itself with fresh content 1 Jean-Paul Sartre, “What is Literature?” And as generations pass and carrying the (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988), 37. message of human freedom, authenticity and 2 Fyodor Dostoevsky, into everyday life far more than any (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001). 3 other philosophy. Indeed, existentialism is SØren Kierkegaard, /The not simply an academic discipline: it is a Sickness Unto (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013).

3 have.4 Martin Heidegger5 and Sartre6 took is one’s own-most concern.10 Such is not the same route; however they argued that necessarily a morally blameworthy concern. one primarily needs to overcome the fear To a certain extent it is simply in our nature, one has of death and live authentically, a biological construct to ensure our own making the one actually survival, and in a world where the is an instead of governed by the of “the arbitrary, relative distinction, judging they” (Das Man, “others”).7 someone’s strong concern for one’s own Sartre and Beauvoir8 wrote in a time interest is simply irrational: it presupposes a much like our own. After the horrors of two notion of the good as correct when that World Wars, the Holocaust, and the advent conception is exactly what must be proved. of the atom bomb, the lived In the present age, have not truly in terror of nuclear annihilation at any time. departed from the age of fear. Rather, the Such was the worst possible scenario, with fear individuals and is the least terrible scenario being a non- more sinister, more personal, and more nuclear III between the mathematically imbalanced. The defining democratic nations and the Soviet Union. As moment of our generation, the governing such, both focused their work under which we operate, is the on living one’s life in light of the inherent, terrorist attacks of 9/11, which demarcated a constant possibility of one’s utter gestalt shift in the way we understand world annihilation and providing some kind of , interfaith , and the impact justification for ethical behavior. Sartre of others in the global age. Instead of the understood that without a creator or peaceful acceptance and optimism that predetermined of humanity and reigned supreme after the fall of the Soviet , the notion of “Good” was Union and the end of the , world completely arbitrary, and so terrible politics and cognitive assessments of atrocities and violations of peaceful interactions were replaced by the ever- existence were possible at any time.9 While present fear of the next terror attack. The Sartre and Beauvoir both argued that we end of one’s possibilities11 that Heidegger have a logical obligation to act in respect to prophesied for each life became the freedom of others as a logical extension an ever-present possibility that was not only of recognizing our own freedom, such an inevitable, but always more likely. Rather ignores the egoistic metaphysical than death by natural causes, accidents, or priority we assign to our own and its some other crime, individuals needed to own freedom: we always experience our worry about the end of their lives coming in own self as a higher priority entity because it an explosion on the way to work or when attending a sporting . The possibility is always there. 4 Friederich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (New York: Penguin Books, 1954). 5 , (Albany: 10 This idea stems from the ontological and University of New York Press, 2010). phenomenological priority of (human 6 Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a existence, ). While he makes no claim (London: Yale University Press, 1996), and Being to normative here, it is easy to make that leap and Nothingness (New York: Washington Square in light of our own biological and Press, 1956). phenomenological . See Heidegger, 41- 7 Heidegger, 122-123. 42. 8 , The Ethics of Ambiguity (New 11 “The possibility of the impossibility of existence York: Citadel Press, 1948). [Existenz] in general. As possibility, death gives 9 Sartre, Existentialism is a Humanism, 28-29. Dasein to ‘be actualized…’” Heidegger, 251.

4 What demarcates this fear from have a “nice” thing or a “mean” thing done others? In the first place, there is the to them. In the case of the victims of of solidarity: at the same time as we extremism, most have done absolutely are united by the ever present fear that our nothing to merit such an action. In the Cold possibilities may end by a terrorist attack, War one can make the same argument, yet we are, at the same time, on an island by again we are confronted with the more ourselves. Nuclear annihilation is certainly personal nature of extremism and the notion far more destructive in terms of the overall that the old conflicts were about national consequences, but in the age of terrorism forces in general, not individual, everyday there is the isolationist notion that the people. The Cold War was also more about tragedy of the attack is always mine. If I am survival, whereas extremists try to remake the victim, it is the result of bad luck, simply the world according to their own wishes. being in the wrong place, or poor judgment Westerners must also live in a world in failing to notice the telltale signs: a in which the illusion that we are loved by suspicious package, someone trying to the rest of the world is completely shattered. conceal something, etc. If I am the This may not be as true for previous bystander, however, the tragedy is still, in a generations as it is for those born in the sense, my own: I now have to live in a world early nineties, for they had already increasingly governed by fear and paranoia, experienced the effects of the struggle a constant shadow that skews my judgment between democracy and communism. For and makes feeling safe impossible. The our generation, however, there was a result is that, in the positive sense, there is pronounced gestalt shift in how we looked at no solidarity: in death I am alone, the world. I, for instance, can clearly and in survival I live in fear. remember a time as a young child when I There is another aspect in which everyone in the world loved each extremist violence seems inherently more other and nobody hated America because it unjust than any potential destruction during was the land of peace and freedom. That the Cold War, and this is a vague conception illusion was shattered far too early for many of innocence. In cases of radical extremism, children of the world: we grew up feeling the victims are rarely combatants or other that a large number of the world’s citizens public authority figures, although they would gladly see us all dead, ruining our certainly may be included as targets. Rather, collective innocence. many if not most of those involved in such There is, regrettably, a kind of attacks are, for all intents and purposes, solidarity in the negative sense as well, an innocent. They did nothing to the attackers exaggerated form of something that Derrida in any positive way unless one wishes to pointed to in our dealings with others: the claim that they played a passive role in the masses and authorities in general seem to structure of capitalism or their country’s have a general mistrust of any person who deeds by the fact of their existence. This is looks like they are from the Middle East. true in cases, in which morality Admittedly, organizations like Al Qaeda and is seen as an ultimate metaphysical , ISIS are primarily run by Muslim and in the that results if extremists. However, it is a gross mistake to is true. Even if there is no predetermined assume that every man, woman, and child of moral code, we still function under a notion Middle Eastern descent or Muslim faith is a of , and morality becomes a of terrorist, and is indeed one of the great whether one did something to deserve to travesties of our time. At the same time,

5 however, Derrida’s work points out that we one’s family can climb no higher on the can never truly know if the other is a friend ladder of success. The most obvious or a foe. Such is even encoded in the origins examples are billionaires, the financial of the word “stranger.”12 We cannot, masters of the world: where are their however, simply assume that the other is children to go? Or imagine being the son of trying to hurt us, both because such is a famous person: unless you do the same or morally wrong, and because of sheer better than your parent, anything you do will statistics: the immensely vast majority are be a step down. The same applies to not terrorists and follow the true, peaceful, ordinary families as well, perhaps not in the tolerant tenets of Islam, and the terrorists sense of reaching one’s zenith, but in terms come from an incredibly small, perverted of one generation simply not being able to distortion. Unfortunately, tragic events stick climb higher: perhaps one’s parents simply out in the far more than their absence, did so well that one may not be able to and so the result is an “us against them” surpass them. Indeed, one of the greatest mentality, a destructive solidarity of fears we face is not reaching our own ignorance and hate that makes true peace potential due to circumstances we cannot impossible. control, or even worse, failing to reach the There is another type of fear that our expectations others force on us. This may be generation must confront that is far less because of their naturally endowed gifts, the sinister than the fear of terrorist annihilation, financial situation they were born into, and but is certainly more personally gripping. the global economy, which has taken We have been told growing up that the massive hits in the recent decades. Interest generation that fought World War II was the in banks is no longer at the staggeringly greatest generation, a generation filled with beneficial rate it was in the eighties, heroic and brilliant (in both a good and a minimum wages have become stagnant, the bad sense) individuals responsible for the job market is horrendous (especially for most important conflicts, events, and social some of the more enjoyable careers that one changes the world has ever known. The might pursue), and there is no new frontier ensuing Cold War brought on an age of to expand into that would give new innovation as the arms race between the resources and opportunities to the youth of United States and Soviet Union grew, even the world. We are trapped in the limits of the forcing man to turn his eyes upward to space Earth, struggling to make the most of the exploration. Our generation must live in the comparatively scant opportunities for drastic constant shadow of those great , growth we are given. aspiring not even to top those achievements, This picture of hopelessness gets but simply to live up to a proportionate level dramatically worse as one travels outside of of success. the Western world to places where economic There is an old saying that the triumph has been impossible for centuries. If greatest a parent can have, aside from one is born in an impoverished country in their child’s , is for their child to Africa or southern Asia, one has little do better in life and be more successful than opportunity to improve one’s circumstances they were. The problem in our time is that because opportunities are far more scarce, this simply may not be possible for everyone and one must compete with far more anymore. There comes a point at which immense numbers of people. Even if aid is given, more often than not it falls into the 12 , “Hostipitality,” in Journal of the wrong hands or is taken by corrupt authority Theoretical Humanities, 2000. 5.

6 figures and never reaches those who need it can achieve is not physical destruction: if most. For individuals in those situations, one is destroyed, one will no longer be freedom is more of a distant than a real capable of even processing that . possibility. Freedom has become a luxury Rather, the greatest harm that can for the rich individuals of the world who produce is the destruction of our freedom. If actually have the capacity to pursue it. we yield to the possibility of demise, the What is to be done about the horrible impossibility of any true sense of lasting predicament in which man finds himself? security, and the fear that the dark forces of We must remember that we are always free, the world wish to inflict on us, we lose any no matter what our situation looks like. sense of what we are. Man is essentially free Sartre was a big proponent of taking full in that he has the power to decide his life for responsibility for one’s choices. Even in himself, the power to strive for meaning in situations in which one would die if one did what would otherwise be a meaningless not do something evil, Sartre insisted that existence. Yielding to the forces of violent the choice was still ours, that we must still conformism defies our own existence and take responsibility and control of our makes a meaningful life impossible, and actions.13 The same is true for both kinds of destroys any chance of using our lives to the fear that grip our world. In the terror case, fullest. We must be cautious, however, one must not be afraid to live one’s life. because extremists can use the notion of Heidegger wrote that recognizing, accepting, authenticity to their own ends. However, and owning the end of one’s possibilities as their desires run counter to the implicit sense a in life was a means of helping of justice that we have already discussed, a one give meaning to the time one has, thus code we all operate under in some way or helping one live authentically: one does another. If the extremist wishes to claim his what one actually wants to do, not what actions are just, the burden of proof is on others think one should, because one him, a burden it is impossible for him to recognizes the certainty of death.14 Putting satisfy, especially given the overwhelming off one’s deepest desires because one will condemnation of his way of life. presumably always have more time results, The same notion applies to the fear more often than not, in dying before one has of not achieving one’s potential or failing to had the chance to do anything one wants to satisfy the expectations of others. The great do at all. Sartre wrote similarly, describing existentialists were always concerned with the notion of “” as denying the overcoming what others wanted of us, either reality that one always has control and one is for good or bad. As an exercise of ultimately responsible for one’s choices and own freedom, we must recognize the need to existence.15 take the paths we hold significant, to become If we are to live authentically, then, what we want to be, not what others wish for we must not just be concerned about what us. If we are the masters of our own fates others want us to do, but about what others and we are the force that gives our own lives try to force us to do. The most tragic meaning, then “failing” to reach the goals consequence that extremism and violence others for us is itself a meaningless : we can only fail if we fail

13 ourselves, for the expectations of others are, Jean-Paul Sartre, “Freedom and Responsibility,” in themselves, meaningless unless we choose Existentialism and Human Emotions (New York: Citadel Press, 1951). to give them any credence. The only way we 14 Heidegger, 255. 15 Sartre, , 87.

7 fail is if we refuse to acknowledge and empower ourselves with our own freedom. Thus we must strive constantly to overcome. We must overcome the expectations and life goals and meanings that others wish to encumber us with. We must strive to overcome the fear that we have of terrorists and extremists who wish to annihilate us. And we must strive to overcome the notion that we will not be good enough, that we will not live up to our potential or what we should accomplish. The only values that truly matter in this world are those we choose to adopt, and the only meaningfulness to be had is the meaning we give ourselves. We must, therefore, adopt a sense of existential courage: we must be courageous in the face of , in the face of death, and the face others. Only by living courageously can we achieve a truly free and meaningful existence.

8