Group 20 is up to present on Jean-Paul Sartre. Next week my group goes and this is making me nervous, because we also have to present on Jean-Paul Sartre but I feel like we can’t talk about the background of who he is anymore. Anyway the skit that group 20 did was terrible at the start but then God came in at the end and made it amazing.
Thad talked chimed in a couple times to say the main idea of this text was that people are responsible for their actions and our actions affect other people. Thad gave the example of how a train conductor in World War 2 was sending people to their deaths. When the train conductor was asked why did he do nothing to stop this, he said,”There was nothing that I could do”. Jean-Paul Sartre would say that you are removing your own responsibility that affect other people. People try to force you into believing that you have no choices, and that their is no other way. Sartre is a believer in absolute freedom; meaning that you always have a choice.
Seth told the story of the scorpion and the toad analogy where a scorpion wants to cross a lake and needs the help of the toad to get across. The toad says no at first because the scorpion would sting him and the scorpion replies that he would die if that happens. So the toad agrees, but halfway across the lake the scorpion stings the toad. Before they drown, the toad asks,” Why did you sting me”. The scorpion answers, “It’s my nature”. The moral of the story being that some choice you have no control over because it’s your nature. Sartre would completely disagree with this fable. The major flaw that I see is that the scorpion made it half across the lake without stinging the toad. The scorpion or whatever the case is, can hold back it’s nature and choose their own freedom.
Before I begin, let me assure you that your group had a wonderful presentation on Sartre. In particular, the first skit you had with Dr. Botham and the additional assignments was the best I've seen in the class. Also, I think that Group 20's skit was good, but the student playing the teacher spoke far too quietly in the beginning.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sartre's argument that there's always something a person can do; they aren't literally locked into a single course of action or decision to be had. I appreciate how you noted that Sartre's concept of absolute freedom was that a person always has a choice. A lot of people, including Sartre's detractors from his time, like to ignore this crucial element. Freedom isn't the ability to levitate; it's the ability to try to do something, even if you might fail at it. Just because something is difficult doesn't mean you should abandon your freedom and hide behind an educated guess of what the herd might do.
Regarding the story of the scorpion and the toad/frog/etc., I think the scorpion resisting his nature until the halfway point of the body of water is just a storytelling convenience. His choice to strike at the one moment when both of their deaths are guaranteed is simply meant to emphasize the outcome in the story. Even If the scorpion's ability to wait is interpreted as a meaningful element in the story itself, one could still argue that nature prevails in the end and that all efforts to fight it will eventually fail.