The Ethics of Ambiguity -- A Literary Review (standard:other, 1273 words)
Author: GXD	Added: Apr 29 2009	Views/Reads: 3698/2188	Story vote: 0.00 (0 votes)
Simone de Beauvoir presentw a feminine view of the ethics in philosophies composed by male writers

A Literary Review of: 

The Ethics of Ambiguity 

by Simone de Beauvoir 

Introduction 

If we are to undertake an intelligent assessment of this work, we must
first make sure that each concept expressed  IN THE TEXT  means exactly 
the same thing to you as it does to me and vice versa.  Unfortunately, 
no translation is ever "perfect" (even though this is a relatively good 
one), and so we have to be sure that what Simone de Beauvoir meant to 
say in French was what we are actually reading in English.  There is a 
difference between "defend" and "protect", for example. 

As we approach concurrence on meanings, we can begin to extract elements
that characterize each philosophy and its corresponding ethic.  We can 
then discuss how closely or how distantly that ethic corresponds to our 
real-world observations, and use this as a tool to illuminate our 
individual pathways to Nirvana.  I think.  One can never be sure.  Life 
is uncertain. 

=================================================== 

N O T E S 

1. Montaigne 

Man, the Individual in a Collectivity, is conscious, aware and
interactive with objects, which include other people.  Life works 
continually toward death. In order to accept this dualism, man must 
have both a body and soul, realizing that only one part of the Self can 
be saved.  Believers either deny death by promising themselves 
immortality, or they deny life as a veil of illusion that hides the 
truth of Nirvana. 

The ethics arising from this life view attempt to evade ambiguity by
dichotomy (absolutism):  either inwardly pure or externally perfect; 
either escaping from the world or total immersion in worldliness; 
either yielding to eternity or tuning in on the pure moment. 

2. Hegel 

Reject nothing, reconcile everything. Time evolves, preserving each
moment. The individual finds her/himself in the collectivity itself.  
Each death cancels out into another Life of Mankind.  Bloody wars may 
be restless spirits, but are not in and of themselves "evil".  The 
human condition is felt as a paradox.  As "supreme beings" we treat 
others as instruments, obstacles or means to an end.  The masters of 
the Bomb created it to destroy themselves - and all else with it.  
Despite the taste for life, each feels tiny amid so many others.  Look 
the truth in the face: we must have reasons to act and must draw 
strength to live from the genuine conditions of life, whatever they may 
be at any given moment.  The ethics arising from this life view still 
need to be explored. 

3. Kierkegaard and 4. Sartre 

The source of all values lies in the freedom of mankind.  A man or woman
chooses her/his own passion -- it is not imposed from outside -- and 
this passion does NOT include unhappiness.  There are no values by 
which to judge the "usefulness" of such a passion.  The intention of 
this passion is to project (future) towards the desired aim or 
objective.  Passionate action discloses the nature of mankind. 

Every human is free; this is absolute.  S/He has the freedom to flee
from destiny or to undertake actions that reveal her/his being.  While 
mankind cannot will her/himself this freedom, s/he can abort that 
freedom in laziness, capriciousness, cowardice or impatience.  For 
example, a person may willingly reject the playful values of childhood 
and embrace the values of a "serious" world, but s/he never feels 
"liberated".  Kierkegaard ridiculed the "serious" person who 
subordinates her/his freedom to outside values, for example, "A 
frivolous lady of fashion can have the mentality of the serious as well 


Click here to read the rest of this story (92 more lines)