Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Necessity vs Freedom

Expand Messages
  • cvas2002@home.com
    Freedom and necessity do not simply have their respective places in the history of philosophy, as any other metaphysical problems do, but they are identified
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 25, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      Freedom and necessity do not simply have their respective places in the history of philosophy, as any other metaphysical problems do, but they are identified with the philosophy of existence as well. Necessity, however, has a more naturalistic and realistic relation to the problems of "being"; it dosen't concern itself for instance with Jame's "loose play", Kierkegaard's
      "leap of faith", Nietzscthe's nihilistic "will to power", Heidegger's "care", Sartre's "condenmnation", and so on. Necessity's role is defined as something it basically doesn't need to be tamper with; all it has to do is "to be". It cannot avail itsel of the demands for want required by nature: food, shelter, physiological needs ect..,but it has to be without disguise. What it is "really" like has to show. It lives through this unescapable fate, and as such, it shows the contant being of "becoming". And since it dosen't tamper with its "being", it is not separate from but is completed by nature---which is judged fatal by the anxiety it projects towards the
      future,or death (these remarks are not to be cofussed with the fatalism of Christianity or the panteism of Spinoza). By contrast,
      freedom's role is essentially detached from nature. It dosen't treat it naturalistically. Freedom's relation to nature is more like the
      canvas upon which consciousness paints a revised and corrected portrait of herself. One of the rules of this transformation is that
      freedom "not" show what it dosen't want it to show. Its true "being" is just an emblem, an icon, a flag. How she attempts to
      manipulate nature, the type of language that she uses, the qualities of her atractiveness---all these are signs, not of what she is
      really like, but of how it wants to be treated, especially consciousness. Consciousness establish her status as "subject".

      Charles


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Robert Galloway
      ... Hi, I just thought I d put in my ante here that Nietzsche s will to power is ANTI-nihilistic. How could you say that it s nihilistic? BG
      Message 2 of 2 , Jan 30, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- cvas2002@... wrote:
        > Freedom and necessity do not simply have their
        > respective places in the history of philosophy, as
        > any other metaphysical problems do, but they are
        > identified with the philosophy of existence as well.
        > Necessity, however, has a more naturalistic and
        > realistic relation to the problems of "being"; it
        > dosen't concern itself for instance with Jame's
        > "loose play", Kierkegaard's
        > "leap of faith", Nietzscthe's nihilistic "will to
        > power",

        Hi,

        I just thought I'd put in my ante here that
        Nietzsche's "will to power" is ANTI-nihilistic. How
        could you say that it's nihilistic?

        BG

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions!
        http://auctions.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.