Sartre was of the opinion that EVERYTHING an individual says or does, is a choice. He did not view this as a positive thing, but rather believed that we are "condemned" to be free. He believed that when a person faints at the sight of blood, it is because s/he willingly, though perhaps subconsciously, gives up, and is thus responsible at some level for his or her faint.
Some are of the opinion that just about nothing is a choice; that everything is determined by psychological, genetic, environmental, or nurture-related factors. The religious might say that God determines everything. They might believe that if a person murders another, it is because s/he was put in a position where due to the makeup of her/his brain, for that individual, there were NO OTHER ALTERNATIVES. This also goes for good deeds; a person might give to the poor because it's inherently in her/his nature to do so.
Do you agree with either extreme? Why?
2007-09-05
03:39:44
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Philosophy