Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Chat about anything your heart desires here, just be civil. Factual or scientific questions about philosophy go here (e.g. "When was Socrates born?"), and so most homework help questions belong here. Note, posts in the off-topic section will not increase new members post counts. This includes the introductions and feedback sections.
Post Reply
sophiepereira
Posts: 5
Joined: May 31st, 2021, 10:02 am

Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by sophiepereira »

Hello all!

I've just written a third-year undergraduate essay with the title:

For Søren Kierkegaard, according to Judith Butler, ‘To posture as a radically self‐generated being, to be the author of one’s will and knowledge, is to deny that one is constituted in and by what is infinitely larger than the human individual.’ Discuss, with reference to Butler, Kierkegaard and/or any other relevant thinker(s).

I've discussed Simone de Beauvoir and her existentialist ethics, as outlined in The Ethics of Ambiguity, as well as how that applies to The Second Sex and what critiques can be made. Any and all advice would be super appreciated :) If you're interested you can private message me with your email or I can post the completed essay on this forum.

(I am actually a literature student doing a philosophy paper so please also keep that in mind!)

- Sophie
MAYA EL
Posts: 177
Joined: May 2nd, 2019, 11:17 pm

Re: Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by MAYA EL »

It is ironic that Philosophy has become something that you can get a degree in and still not know anything about life or how to navigate through it

And a persons words valued based on how many dead philosophers you can reference the single question /sentence / statement and any self-appointed Authority on any opinion is laughed at as if it's the most ridiculous thing a person can do.

And we wonder why philosophy hasn't helped the world.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by Terrapin Station »

sophiepereira wrote: July 21st, 2021, 1:34 pm ‘To posture as a radically self‐generated being, to be the author of one’s will and knowledge, is to deny that one is constituted in and by what is infinitely larger than the human individual.’
Putting aside that we'd need to define "radically" self-generated, I don't agree that being the author of one's will and knowledge amounts to denying anything about the world in general. I'd have to look at your argument for that.

I'd say rather than it's impossible for an individual to not be the author of their own will and knowledge. You can't acquire those things from someone or something else any more than you could get your breathing or circulation from someone else. You have to be the "author" or your own breathing and circulation.
User avatar
Tom Butler
Posts: 107
Joined: February 23rd, 2017, 10:24 pm

Re: Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by Tom Butler »

Terrapin Station wrote: July 28th, 2021, 9:36 am
I'd say rather than it's impossible for an individual to not be the author of their own will and knowledge. You can't acquire those things from someone or something else any more than you could get your breathing or circulation from someone else. You have to be the "author" or your own breathing and circulation.
There is little doubt that we have, at best, conditional free will - self-determination. Without the lucidity to effectively challenge the validity of our perception, we tend to live the life we have been taught.

Sophie, I would be happy to read your essay. I am not a trained philosopher but I do have a sense of metaphysical reason.

It probably does not give me additional credibility to be a Butler. :-)
sophiepereira
Posts: 5
Joined: May 31st, 2021, 10:02 am

Re: Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by sophiepereira »

Hello to everyone who has responded (publically and in my DMs)!

Thank you so much for commenting back, and for the really gracious offers to take a look at my essay. I didn't realise that I don't have access to direct messages on this forum yet, so I'll post my essay on this forum (as I want to respect the site's restriction on links to external sites). Feel free to add any comments publically or drop me a DM which I will be reading even if not replying!

I am currently switching between topics quite rapidly so this essay has been left 'in the works' and has a few comments from a friend added which I am yet to attend to. Please also forgive the missing titles of works/ philosophers - all will be polished up at a later date and I can direct people to the texts I used if they're interested! :)

Thank you so much again - it is really appreciated.

Essay:

(2019)
For Søren Kierkegaard, according to Judith Butler, ‘To posture as a radically self‐generated  being, to be the author of one’s will and knowledge, is to deny that one is constituted in  and by what is infinitely larger than the human individual.’     Discuss, with reference to Butler, Kierkegaard and/or any other relevant thinker(s). 


Judith Butler’s quotation outlines Søren Kierkegaard’s description of the process and consequence of an individual engaging their ontological freedom. Kierkegaard endorses individuals being so self-directing as part of his overall philosophical project to reinvigorate subjectivity. In turn, he wanted to deplete the influence of the structures shaping peoples’ choices, conduct, and opinions, including the general concept of an overarching moral dictum. In Mary Warnock’s work [to be inserted], for example, she lists examples such as the ‘standards of history and science’, ’rule-governed morality’, and ‘laws’. //quote or rephrase (mary xxx)// Such a vision establishes Kierkegaard’s work as an origin point for existentialist philosophy and its ethical developments - he turns towards an ethics of subjective voluntarism that is further developed by Simone de Beauvoir with the influence of Jean Paul Sartre. (add their link here) In addition, Beauvoir’s work interrogates the tension between the individual and the collective that is raised in this quotation. If we allow for a touch of hyperbole, Butler’s phrase ‘what is infinitely larger than the human individual’ encompasses a range of modes of belonging and being shaped. We might include how one is constituted within social and cultural history, one’s location in the contemporary social structure, or even how one’s identity is forged within linguistic networks. All examples are underpinned by the pre-established notion that, as an autonomous individual, the choices through which we define ourselves are limited by our intersubjective situation. Someone pushing to expand their choices and overcome their situational boundaries is someone Sartre would consider living authentically as a ‘being-for-itself’. Such a being is conscious, and fulfils the ontological necessity to constantly make choices in order to create the ‘essence’ that succeeds all conscious beings’ existence. Following along Sartrean lines, Beauvoir examines how women, an oppressed group with greatly limited situational freedom, can empower themselves to become (or restrict themselves from becoming) these ‘beings for themselves’.

The Ethics of Ambiguity and The Second Sex are Beauvoir’s two seminal texts that both, to difference degrees, detail her version of an existentialist ethics and its application to the situation of women’s oppression. Following Kierkegaard, she questions how the dynamics between a subject and their situation might be conflicting, just as Kierkegaard implies that one must deny one’s situation in order to assert one’s freedom. In relation to Sartre, Beauvoir (according to [to be inserted]) displayed a more astute understanding of the complexities of situatedness than could be encompassed by Sartre’s notion of radical freedom. She realised far sooner that situations limit our freedom to act and they do so differently, if not more severely, for some than others(more formal). She utilises the two terms transcendence and immanence to navigate these ideas. Transcendence is the capacity to engage in creative and dynamic activities that cultivate an authentic sense of meaning, as compared to immanence which is to maintain one’s life at its most basic and functional level - this is not authentic living. In The Ethics of Ambiguity, Beauvoir describes oppression as the stifling of transcendence: ‘transcendence is condemned to fall uselessly back upon itself because it is cut off from its goals. That is what defines a situation of oppression’. Traced through to her examination of women’s oppression, in The Second Sex she confirms that the extreme limits of a woman’s situation enclose her in ‘the limbo of immanence and contingency’. A woman’s sense of restriction is so unwavering because, analysed in Sartrean terms, Beauvoir sees that men are constantly pursuing that ‘impossible synthesis of the for-itself and the in-itself’. (rephrase) As such, they strive to assert that their dominance is intrinsic, ultimate, and as unchanging as the essence of an object. Such an understanding provides the first evidence of the masculinist underpinning of Kierkegaard’s idea, as summarised by Butler. //(more explicit)// The idea that asserting oneself as a free individual means stepping outside of the collectivity is predicated on a binary between the individual and the collective. However, to Beauvoir’s mind, women are unaccounted for in the realm of subjects. As she famously states, women are ‘the other’, they are not referenced when one speaks of mankind and are prohibited from achieving the authentic life that transcendence promises. Women have to fight to declare their freedom before they are even permitted into the collective. //(add more personal analysis)//

Such is the project Beauvoir champions, and yet she explores the idiosyncrasy of women’s oppression due to the extent of the ‘deep complicity’ that ‘The man who sets the woman up as an Other’ will find //(replace by another word)//. It is at this crux that ontology meets ethics for Beauvoir. She divides freedom between ontology and morality, as [to be inserted] outlines. Ontological freedom, as Sartre established, is unchanging - it is a virtue of our consciousness and is inescapable. Moral freedom, however, is a response to one’s ontological freedom. One asserts their moral freedom when they utilise their ontological freedom to make choices assigning value to certain ethical content in the world. //(add a quote)// As Beauvoir summarises in The Ethics of Ambiguity, ‘To will oneself moral and to will oneself free are one and the same decision’. Further, she establishes that ‘To will oneself free is also to will others free’, countering the idea that she aligns herself solely for or against the Hegelian iteration of the master-slave dialectic. In addition, summarising Beauvoir in this way makes the familiar accusation that an existentialist ethics endorses ethical subjectivism redundant. She outlines that an objective morality of the pursuit and maintenance of freedom for all underlies the value one subjectively confers to ethical content. In addition //(repetitive)//, she outlines the ontological necessity of recognising others’ freedom by drawing in equal measure from the Heideggerian concept of Mitsein, ‘the human reality… is at once a Mitsein and separation’. However far we recognise that other consciousnesses infringe on our experience, we desire the experience of meaning in the world which is only achievable through intersubjective significations. As Sartre puts it in Existentialism is a Humanism, when one ‘[chooses] for himself he chooses for all men’, meaning when one endorses the value of freedom, one defines it as valuable for all. Beauvoir evidences this by commenting that ‘the freedom of others keeps each one of us from hardening in the absurdity of facticity’ - treating others as being-for-themselves assures the collective’s transcendence also(move in the sentence). Thus, the case is not so dichotomous as Kierkegaard implies. In Beauvoir’s eyes one can be, and can only ever be, an autonomous subject when one operates under the infinite umbrella of collective significations. //(summary in two lines)//

Yet, because one’s( replace by “individual”) moral freedom is a fulfilment of ontological freedom, one can also face the temptation to flee one’s freedom by refusing to engage their morality. In Sartrean terms, when one is faced with the ‘anguish’ of freedom in making their ethical claim, so too does one face the ‘temptation to flee freedom and to make himself into a thing’. In The Second Sex, Beauvoir examines this conundrum in relation to women and their complicity in their oppression by continuing in “bad faith”. Once again, Kierkegaard and Beauvoir’s views grate against one another. To the former, the mark of a free being is through the denial of one //(subjects unified)// ’s circumstance, whereas the latter believes that agency requires the awareness of one’s belonging to a contextual situation and the ability one has to change it. For example, Beauvoir turns readers towards the situation of women rather bluntly - ‘Yes, women in general are today inferior to men; that is, their situation provides them with fewer possibilities: the question is whether this state of affairs must be perpetuated’. Relatedly, she firmly establishes that for women to not exploit ‘a possibility of liberation’ if and when it arrives is a moral transgression. At once, ‘transcendence lapses into immanence’, existence is degraded into an ‘in-itself’, and if the subject consents, ‘this fall is a moral fault’ and ‘an absolute evil’. From this perspective, her view supports Kierkegaard’s point that one should not resign themselves to their position in the collective, however it is only by asserting themselves from within the collective that ethical choices are impactful. In addition, a key distinction that [to be inserted] raises from Beauvoir’s work is that ‘Being led into temptation is also ethically different from being forcibly kept in ignorance’. Such an observation implies that Beauvoir has some concept of an educator that will enlighten women to their freedom and uncover the possibilities for liberation. In line with the desire for existentialism to be a practical philosophy, perhaps we can envision Beauvoir self-concept as a version of Plato’s philosopher leading women out of their cave. //(unfinished, explain it more)//

However, ‘ambiguity’ remains the key term for Beauvoir (becasue xxx). For example, she makes the concession that ‘certain adults live in the universe of the serious in all honesty’, those ‘denied all instruments of escape’, the ‘enslaved’ or the ‘mystified’. Amidst such overarching ambiguity, therefore, between ‘antecedent limits (facticity) and future possibilities (transcendence)’ - as William Schroeder puts it - it seems amiss to set up such a manichean division between morality and evil (between good and evil in terms of binary moralities?). Who decides where the potential for action definitively lies and when it is missed? How does one firmly define an act in pursuit of female liberation? If ambiguity always remains, it seems that the possibility of having committed an ‘evil’ (acknowledgement of “evil”?) places a forbidding ethical weight on individuals. Such is the limitation of lifting an ethics out of ontology, for one attempts to satisfy abstract ontological categories. Though Beauvoir herself argues against the effectiveness of measuring an ethical action according to happiness, ‘We cannot really know what the word ‘happiness’ means, and still less what authentic values it covers’, we can see the temptation of striving towards a more formal measurement //(term/name)//. Along similar lines, her ethics of ambiguity seems strangely incongruous with her endorsement of the idea that if one cannot ultimately change their situation, they should rebel via suicide. She writes, ‘Revolt can then be achieved only in the definitive rejection of the imposed situation, in suicide’. //(title)// Albert Camus would counter such a view virulently, as exemplified by his seminal work The Myth of Sisyphus, for he argues that the greatest rebellion against an unchangeable situation is to find meaning in it. Recall the final resounding line of his work, ‘One must imagine Sisyphus happy’. Both cases are evidence of The Second Sex's contextual grounding, for the whole text is punched through with the spirit of wartime that garners a mentality of being ‘either for or against us’, all in or all out //(committed or withdrawn?)//. Again, the practical project of existentialism falters, for it means that (especially in an ethical project) the works are inextricable from how context has informed them. Ironically, such a case exemplifies the naivety of Kierkegaard’s view and reinforces the impossibility of turning one’s back on all that one is shaped by.

Making a final departure from Kierkegaard, Beauvoir establishes that collective action itself is the most important element of escaping oppression. She concedes that, as summarised by [to be inserted}, where ‘individuals are often powerless to alter significantly the social dimensions of their situations’, (link) ’effective collective resistance to oppressive practices is sometimes possible’. Beauvoir also makes the case that women lack the capacity to conceptualise themselves as part of a collective because they are inhibited from using the word ‘we’. As a result, referring to themselves as ‘women’ means their linguistic self-reference continues to be refracted through a patriarchal lens. The first, and most obvious question, however, is how women are ever going to be able to say ‘we’. [Discuss Butler here?] In addition, Beauvoir’s writing again recalls a war-time spirit as she claims that while there should be no contempt for the individual, ‘no other salvation [will be possible] than his subordination to the collectivity’. Thus, the individual’s only power becomes the power they have within the collective //(obscure, more explicit)//. Subsequently, what realistic leverage do they have if the collective veers in a direction they want to change? Though Kierkegaard glorifies the individual all too much, perhaps Beauvoir is at risk of overshadowing them altogether. Lastly, by arguing that women will only achieve liberation at their own collective volition, there remains something uncomfortable about the moral obligation resting on the shoulders of the oppressed (patriarchal) party. Turning back to Sartre, though one man ‘[chooses] for himself he chooses for all men’ - and Beauvoir argues that they really do only choose for men - it takes a female collective to assert their choice and they can only do so for the separate category that is their sex. Namely, the loose phrasing becomes ‘we, as women, value the freedom you have as a man’ and not ‘you as a person need to recognise the freedom we have as people’ - there is a difference between fighting for //(women/human being)// freedom and fighting for recognition of freedom. //(Butler’s perspective)// Such a subtle difference seems to condemn women to belong to female identity and their women group, and re-establishes the framework that freedom is a women’s issue in terms of patriarchal society. Fortunately, though this view remains realistic for Beauvoir’s time, and aspects of our own, there is no doubt that the politics of liberation are moving beyond it. Ultimately, though, the privileged view of Kierkegaard //(as summarised by Butler)// rings true again; he presumes that one always has the capacity to choose between individuality and collectivity when Beauvoir makes the point that women resoundingly don’t. //(summary)//
User avatar
Tom Butler
Posts: 107
Joined: February 23rd, 2017, 10:24 pm

Re: Would anyone give me some essay feedback?

Post by Tom Butler »

As a technical writer, I was often beat about my head for using too many big words. Of course, every field of study has its "inside baseball" terminology, but to me, your draft has a lot of ambiguity due to terminology that the "insider" is expected to understand ... never mind the public.

Take the first line: "Judith Butler’s quotation outlines Søren Kierkegaard’s description of the process and consequence of an individual engaging their ontological freedom." "Ontological freedom"? Is this the metaphysical ontology or is it a reference to naming? It is a novel twist in terminology for me. Is that a reference to someone

Without the omitted material, I found myself in the middle of subjects without context.

I think I am not academically up to the task of offering you useful feedback.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophers' Lounge”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021