Freud says, "Human life in common is only made possible when a majority comes together which is stronger than any separate individual and which remains united against all separated individuals" (49).
If Freud is right, and that the community, for its betterment must prevent individuality, than how can one be an existentialist in a society as Freud describes it? Existentialism provides that each individual must define his own meaning or his own life. What if this in conflict with what society believes? What if one finds meaning through being a killer, murderer or a rapist? How far can existentialism really be extended in society? Existentialists agree that God does not exist. What right does one man have to tell another that his meaning is wrong? There is no deity that preached that his meaning is wrong. Each individual's new meaning is just as legitimate to another's no matter how objectionable it is. Existentialism legitimizes almost anything. In my opinion there is almost no way that an existentialist society could exist. People wouldn't be immoral, they would be amoral; they would have no morality. Moral relativity has to be absolute in existentialism and anything and everything would have to be tolerated. Society requires a certain code of conduct. Life cannot exist without some sort of rules and morality.
One could argue that if a number of existentialist atheists agreed to live by a certain code of morality, they could live in a state of order and stable society. But, whats to keep a person that has no final judgement to fear from breaking any rules he or she wants to break? They will only get punished if they get caught. One could also argue that religious people break rules just the same. That is undeniably true. But, if a religious person is religious in "practice" and not just "in name", then he would feel guilty for breaking an established code of morality. His religion serves somewhat as a check to his actions and controls his morality. Existentialists do not have this check.
Society and Atheism/Existentialism cannot coexist. Our society comfortably exists due to the sameness rather than the diversity of religion. It is wrong to kill, steal, abuse, rape, etc...Every major religion preaches this. However, atheism and existentialism preach nothing. They preach that an individual may find a meaning in whichever way he finds right. Although our society tries to become increasingly acceptable to all perspectives and all people, how relative can morality become? Where can one draw the line? If an existentialist believes in killing for his meaning than how can he be punished? In his conscience he is saving himself. He is achieving meaning. In modern society can we really have total freedom of belief?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment