Friday, April 10, 2015

Let Freedon Ring!


            Freedom by definition means having the power or right to act, speak, or think as you please without any inhibiting you from doing so. This last week we discussed the view of philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre. Sartre’s point is about the moral undertone about being responsible. He points out subjects and objects. Objects are based on facticity and subjects are based on both facticity and transcendence –freedom. He also discussed that lying to oneself is not possible because in order to lie you need to know the truth and if you know the truth you cannot lie while knowing the truth to yourself, or at least that is what Sartre says.

            During our second symposium we discussed whether or not a mentally ill person was fully responsible for his or her actions. The class came to a conclusion that mentally ill people are not fully responsible because they are not “free”. Since they are “mentally” ill, depending on the type of illness, the person can either think or not think which according to Sartre; one is free just as long one has the freedom to think. Now with this in mind, we can agree that there are certain things that an ill person is not responsible for, however what about when he or she knows what is best and clearly understand the point of it. For example when an ill person decides not to get help or take medications, they know they can change their mental state with helps but yet do not take it. According to Sartre, they are free to do as they please whether the outcome is good or bad, but what would be you guys’ opinion on someone who is ill, mentally, but yet does not know that he or she is ill and continues living his or her life as if nothing were wrong? Would it be the same as the mentally ill person, which is that they are not fully responsible on certain actions/decisions that he or she chooses to take?

3 comments:

  1. If a mentally ill person choose to not take their medicine would it really be their chose? They are truly never free because their state of mind is ultimately different from everyone elses from birth till death. I would argue they are different no matter what operation/drug is used to treat a mentally ill person, their mind without drugs is unhinged and with drugs is altered to the drugs whims.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that the despite their knowledge about their illness, mental disorder people should not be held responsible for a committed crime. There are thousands of people in the world that suffer from multi-personality and never find out until they are older. During that time period one of their personalities can commit a crime without the original personality knowing. Therefore, mental disorder people should not be trial for a crime.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have been around mentally ill people before and I can tell you that they cannot be fully held responsible. Sure, it can be confusing and at times uncomfortable through the eyes of a completely healthy person. However, if a mentally ill person comes up to me and grabs my arm forcefully, I may be startled at first, but you can't just sit there and fully blame the person for their behavior. Of course, there are plenty of factors that may provide exceptions, but at the end of the day it is ridiculous to see someone who has a mental hindrance as a fully responsible person.

    ReplyDelete