Group 13 presented on Dostoevsky, and the idea of the underground man. I just have say, they have done by far the best skit out of all the groups. The presentation was excellent, and the skit took the main idea and made it easy for everyone in the class to follow. It was a long skit lasting around eight minutes, and it really set the stage for the rest of the class.
The main idea presented by Dostoevsky was the idea of the Underground man. A person who has the free will to choose a completely random choice free of reason. Group 13 presented the idea, “Desire completely and stubbornly opposes reason”. Thad later gave the hypothetical situation; a choice between a blue button that grants wealth and a yellow button that has the person’s eyes poked with needles. He said the underground man could chose to pick the yellow button with no reason for choosing. I disagreed with the situation and Thad said, “You’re a scientist”. A scientist from the skit meant that you believed that every choice could be connected to a reason. We don’t do things without reason. You might say that you had no reason to do something, but there is always a reason.
This reminded me of the time we were talking about “wants”. I know with different authors you get different views of Existentialism, but the idea sounded very logical to me. Thad gave the situation of taking out the garbage, and even though he didn't want to do it he did it anyway to make his wife happy. Even if there are more favorable options you can choose a different choice but must want to do it. I know some people tried to say some situations in which they felt the choice was unwanted such as touching a hot plate that they knew was hot. Maybe they felt curious and wanted to see if they could touch it, maybe they were in a hurry to do something else, whatever the reason. They wanted to do it.
By the standards of Dostoevsky, I too, would be a scientist. I think that there are very few who would be considered underground men. The very concept of the most advantageous advantage is confusing... When we label it "free will," it seems easier to understand, but is free will really the option to choose something for no reason? To me, free will is coming up with a decision, rationale, thought, etc… completely and totally on your own; there are no outside forces or thoughts that influence whatsoever. I also think that the very word “will” implies a motivation or reasoning.
ReplyDeleteI also agree about the hot plate and garbage situations- there always seems to be a reason for doing something. As some of the past existentialist readings have suggested, the motivation for all of our actions are personal gain. The concept of having zero reason is over my head. I truly cannot think of an example. But I guess that is what makes me (and perhaps you, too) a scientist..
The only situation I can come up with that could remotely help me to relate the most advantageous advantage is when someone suggests something and says “say the first thing that comes to mind.” There may not be a reason you choose the answer that you do or say what you say, it is simply the first thing that comes to mind. Perhaps that is the whole idea behind the underground man? There is no thought, there is only action. I feel like there is no purpose in that situation, though. Thus, how could it possibly be the most advantageous advantage?