" Existentialism is a philosophical movement which posits that individuals create the meaning and essence of their lives"
-a yahoo answer
Based on my limited knowledge and understanding of the Paris attacks and what we talked about in class it is my opinion that existentialism would provide the best answer as to how the average person should proceed with their response.
For people who are struggling comprehending existentialism, Google defines it as:
a philosophical theory or approach that emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will.
My interpretation of existentialism is very inspiring for me. Raised as a Christian I was taught the slave mode of valuation, since I am slave of God, he is the one who has assigned me my self-worth. However Nietzche comes to rescue me out of the dark hole that can be and divulges a huge brainshock. You know you can define your own destiny and there is nothing wrong with it. The more I think about it, why would I want to be trapped into doing something what invisible entity suggests I do?
According to this philosophy, I would continue that is the individual who should decide how they should respond instead of waiting on their government to tell them what the country's course of action should be. For someone who believes that every individual is capable of making fully informed decisions once given the education, I uphold the above mentioned statement. Existentialism says that we are responsible for our destiny, we are the creators of it. That is empowering.
To continue with what Richard said in class that this country is the one who created the political landscape in the middle east is very logical. I use the analogy if i were a dog and my master or another dog kept abusing me. I would have two options: to fight back and show that I am a person as well or flee the responsibility of proving my worth. In my opinion, it would be useful to show that I am a dog who is capable of being treated as an equal and for us to get along there has to be give and take. This goes back to Sartre's idea if 2 freedoms met. However, if compromise happens, then both freedoms can exist as long as the recognize each other. Likewise, I think a lot of conflict can be prevented if we are willing to compromise and genuinely examine what is it that the other side wants.
In this case, the members of this group have probably grown in a war-torn land. They are just seeking closure through revenge. They want the rest of the world to know their story in the quickest way possible.
An interesting line in the video I have shared below is the line that the bombers were shouting you killed our brothers in syria. Whether that is true or only a way to create terror in the minds of citizens, thats for you to decide.
As we continue in our encounters, a word of caution: Please be respectful to any being you meet. As hard as it may be, please do not go with preconceived ideas. Talking with my mom and some other people, I heard the remark along the lines, they didnt know how to distinguish between a "terrorist" and "those kinf of immigrants". It took me by surprise that some people would treat people of a different skin complexion based on stereotypes. And its sad to say that most of us, myself included, have fallen victim to this flawed way of thinking.
Now a word of advice according to existentialism: Since we are in control of our destinies, it is up to us to create the best possible version of ourselves and to be accepting to all people.
The problem with a third option in Sartre's idea of freedom is that when people are looking for recognition as a free entity they do not consider the possibility that there is another free entity like themselves. This is where the disconnect arises and starts off wars to find that recognition. In the case of the Paris attacks, we've seen how people like ISIS will react in order to gain recognition. What was surprising however was the reaction from the people of Paris. Although from the government the response was different, the people of Paris started the #PorteOuverte, or #OpenDoor, as a symbol that as the night drowned in chaos, they opened their doors.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure that it is even possible to neatly wrap the logic of ISIS up into one philosophical theory. While some of the points certainly match up - especially those involving the interactions of different freedoms - I don't think they have anything in mind besides wreaking havoc, even if it is for the purpose of vengeance. I agree though that we definitely should not judge anyone just because of their race or where they come from, and I think it's rather...unpleasant of us to deny refugees, especially considering the screening process they go through to even try to take shelter in this country.
ReplyDeleteAli,
DeletePlease visit this article for 5 minutes to get an inside view of what the mentality does look like.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall/ask-a-jihadi-an-isis-fighters-blog-about-life-in-syria#.puz19kPEN
Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a very interesting post about the Paris attacks in comparison to the different takes on existentialism. The point I want to touch on is how stereotypes in relation to the color of your skin can always sway people's ideas and opinions without even knowing the person. From what I know about the Paris attacks, not all of them were from Middle Eastern background, but some were Europeans that have joined ISIS. So I find it interesting that people like to stereotype people based on their race and then their own race goes against them. Overall, I really enjoyed your post.
The events in Paris were really unfortunate. Terrorism is bad because innocent people dies. Elizabeth I would like to give my opinion about the Paris attacks. I agree with you, no one knows what really happened or what is behind all of this tragedy. Whenever I heard that ISIS is the bad group, bad guys, I feel upset because people can't judge without knowing the causes of something, these people's actions. I am not in any of the sides. I prefer to be neutral. Many people say that Paris attack first, and that this group was seeking revenge. No one is sure about the truth because the Government will always lie. Another thing that upsets me really bad is the fact that people cared a lot about what happened in Paris, but similar or worse things happened in other things of the world. Guess what! No one cared. The world is falling into pieces and the only thing people do is going to a social media page an change their profile picture, etc. We have to open our eyes. The Governments around the world must learn to forgive, and to recognize. Leaders don't care about people; they care about power. Let's hope that the world changes to be good and peaceful because otherwise innocent people,women, children, etc. will continue dying and suffering.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth,
ReplyDeleteI found your post very interesting. Pondering the way an existentialist might respond to the Paris attacks surely gives us something to think about. I agree with Ali that it is hard to try to apply one philosophical theory to explain ISIS, but I think your thoughts on the topic were well put. I do agree that our government and others should not try to avoid any responsibility for refugees. And that we should not stereotype people based on their skin color, ethnic background or nationality. It is saddening that when events like this occur there is almost always a backlash and influx in discrimination.
I also thought your post was very intriguing. I cannot begin to wrap my mind around what thoughts go through the minds of terrorists; I also cannot begin to think of terrorism as one single philosophical idea. The chaos and confusion that has occurred in Paris cannot be compared into one. I find it very interesting the way you attempted to combine all of these concepts inot one and think that your ideas make sense.
ReplyDeleteElizabeth,
ReplyDeleteThis post opened my ideas to many new ideas, and I think that in writing it you experienced some new revelations yourself, and I applaud you for that. However, I do have reservations similar to what Rachel and Ali expressed about trying to use this philosophical theory to rationalize everything that is going on in the Middle East. One thing that I do like is how you used existentialism to look at racial profiling. Racism and colorism would be a hard sell to someone who is a true existentialist. The very fact that the philosophy advocates the autonomy of the individual would make it impossible to group people into categories based on race, color, or creed.
I loved how this was topically related to real world events. I really enjoyed reading it and I think McKenzie's insight was very well thought out.
ReplyDelete