Friam

Fwd: Freedom: Sarte v Camus

Classic

List

Threaded

3 messages Options

Steve Smith

Fwd: Freedom: Sarte v Camus

Interesting contrast between two P(p)hilosophers (and friends) on the topic of Freedom... a little dated but maybe good background on contemplating our current paradox of "what means Freedom?"

‘Absolute freedom is the right of the strongest to dominate,’ Camus wrote, while ‘absolute justice is achieved by the suppression of all contradiction: therefore it destroys freedom.’ The conflict between justice and freedom required constant re-balancing, political moderation, an acceptance and celebration of that which limits the most: our humanity. ‘To live and let live,’ he said, ‘in order to create what we are.’

Sartre read The Rebel with disgust. As far as he was concerned, it was possible to achieve perfect justice and freedom – that described the achievement of communism. Under capitalism, and in poverty, workers could not be free. Their options were unpalatable and inhumane: to work a pitiless and alienating job, or to die. But by removing the oppressors and broadly returning autonomy to the workers, communism allows each individual to live without material want, and therefore to choose how best they can realise themselves. This makes them free, and through this unbending equality, it is also just.

from

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-camus-and-sartre-split-up-over-the-question-of-how-to-be-free

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Prof David West

Re: Fwd: Freedom: Sarte v Camus

Camus talks of "create what we are," Sartre "best they can realize themselves." It might appear that they both have some kind of belief in an innate Potential-of -Man.

Echoes of this seem to be foundational for the current fascination with Universal Basic Income. If Iona Innocent were relieved of her "material want" she would immediately turn into a poetess, philosopher, artisan, exemplar of all that is Human.

From my reading of both philosophers, but not the entire canon of either, I believe that Camus is less naive in this regard than Sartre. Part of my belief stems from Sartre's conviction that communism was THE answer.

Both seem to blur issues of 'freedom-from' and 'freedom-to'. This same conflation of different notions results in cross-talk and therefore miscommunication between different cultural-political factions in the U.S.

davew

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, at 1:55 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:

Interesting contrast between two P(p)hilosophers (and friends) on the topic of Freedom... a little dated but maybe good background on contemplating our current paradox of "what means Freedom?"

‘Absolute freedom is the right of the strongest to dominate,’ Camus wrote, while ‘absolute justice is achieved by the suppression of all contradiction: therefore it destroys freedom.’ The conflict between justice and freedom required constant re-balancing, political moderation, an acceptance and celebration of that which limits the most: our humanity. ‘To live and let live,’ he said, ‘in order to create what we are.’

Sartre read The Rebel with disgust. As far as he was concerned, it was possible to achieve perfect justice and freedom – that described the achievement of communism. Under capitalism, and in poverty, workers could not be free. Their options were unpalatable and inhumane: to work a pitiless and alienating job, or to die. But by removing the oppressors and broadly returning autonomy to the workers, communism allows each individual to live without material want, and therefore to choose how best they can realise themselves. This makes them free, and through this unbending equality, it is also just.
from

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-camus-and-sartre-split-up-over-the-question-of-how-to-be-free

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Fwd: Freedom: Sarte v Camus

Freedom from, freedom to.. Meh. How does physics facilitate free will exactly? What if all we can do is look back on mistakes? How could it be otherwise?

Marcus

On Apr 27, 2020, at 4:22 AM, Prof David West <[hidden email]> wrote:

Camus talks of "create what we are," Sartre "best they can realize themselves." It might appear that they both have some kind of belief in an innate Potential-of -Man.

Echoes of this seem to be foundational for the current fascination with Universal Basic Income. If Iona Innocent were relieved of her "material want" she would immediately turn into a poetess, philosopher, artisan, exemplar of all that is Human.

From my reading of both philosophers, but not the entire canon of either, I believe that Camus is less naive in this regard than Sartre. Part of my belief stems from Sartre's conviction that communism was THE answer.

Both seem to blur issues of 'freedom-from' and 'freedom-to'. This same conflation of different notions results in cross-talk and therefore miscommunication between different cultural-political factions in the U.S.

davew

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, at 1:55 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:

Interesting contrast between two P(p)hilosophers (and friends) on the topic of Freedom... a little dated but maybe good background on contemplating our current paradox of "what means Freedom?"

‘Absolute freedom is the right of the strongest to dominate,’ Camus wrote, while ‘absolute justice is achieved by the suppression of all contradiction: therefore it destroys freedom.’ The conflict between justice and freedom required constant re-balancing, political moderation, an acceptance and celebration of that which limits the most: our humanity. ‘To live and let live,’ he said, ‘in order to create what we are.’

Sartre read The Rebel with disgust. As far as he was concerned, it was possible to achieve perfect justice and freedom – that described the achievement of communism. Under capitalism, and in poverty, workers could not be free. Their options were unpalatable and inhumane: to work a pitiless and alienating job, or to die. But by removing the oppressors and broadly returning autonomy to the workers, communism allows each individual to live without material want, and therefore to choose how best they can realise themselves. This makes them free, and through this unbending equality, it is also just.

from

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/how-camus-and-sartre-split-up-over-the-question-of-how-to-be-free

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam

unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ...
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/