Ethics of Ambiguity by Simone de Beauvoir

Simone De Beavoir

grew up middle class in Paris, youngest to pass the aggregation exam in philosophy ever, dismissed from teaching by the Nazis, public intellectual, complicated relationship with philosophy, took advantage of uneven power dynamics

Historical Background

Nazi occupation of Paris, French resistance uprising, liberation of Paris, 1st election where women have suffrage

Existentialism

Human beings create themselves through their actions and create who they are by engaging with the world, it is not pre-determined for us; we are condemned to be free, since there is nothing defining us we take up the task of responsibility with this freedom which is often not fun

Issues of existential ethics

making choices as an ethical agent and taking responsibility for those choices, facticity

facticity

aspects of life that are given, no one has control over them

existential ethics

action is good if it advances fundamental freedom and acknowledges the real living embodied limitations of circumstances meaning th means and the ends both matter

bad faith

disingenuousness, failure to take responsibility for views or actions, failure to recognize situational limits, failure to treat other people with respect as rational human beings

good faith

living and choosing in a way that invokes fairness, authenticity, honesty, and fairness about ones own limitations; characterized by respect for another persons dignity and freedom

the serious world and play

children are happily irresponsible when they are born; they explore freedom to imagine and from ethical responsibility and accountability; freedom with exuberance without anxiety

willing ones facticity

concerns knowing one is fundamentally free and choosing this freedom as the motivation for acting; a kind of bad faith comes from leaning into unchosen external circumstances passively; involves clinging to facticity to avoid the agony of freedom

discovering subjective freedom via intersubjectivity in adolescence

children recognize they are free growing up by seeing freedom in others; at a certain point children figure out how they do and don’t want to be; in order to be a good person you must acknowledge realities of facticity and freedom to choose how to live -—> this is often hard do people take place in refusal which is the freedom of avoidance

Day 1 Major Takeaways

historical context of Beauvoir’s existential ethics: existential ethical crosses(was, violence, genocide, hunger)

existence precedes essence; we are condemned to be free

distinction between freedom and facticity and the problem with willing ones facticity

good and bad faith

subjectivity through intersubjectivity

we take solace in freedom of refusal because it is hard to be a good person; you recognize your own free self consciousness by viewing the free self conciousn3ess others have; you are able to recognize parts of yourself in another person yet are able to view the other person as their own entity; MUTUAL RECOGNITION IS THE CONIDITION FOR FREE SUBJECTIVITY

willing ones freedom and the discourse of + and - freedoms

negative freedom= freedom to say no

positive freedom= freedom to become oneself through specific choices and actions

you can’t have positive freedom without negative freedom; we exercise both but only positive freedom is ethical because negative freedom is passive and denies action that would cause responsibility to be needed

ambiguity

uncertain or inexact; being open to more than one interpertation

Unlike other existentialists Beauvoir tells us not to be paralyzed by ambiguity but to act amidst it

Antinome

a real contradiction between two conclusions, both of which are justified; when two different outcomes contradict each other but both outcomes seem justified; this leaves a person with the question of what to do when viowing action through the lens of existential ethics

2 futures

present and future are continuous, the preset contains the future within it and is quasi linear; present vs future= separate, this is where the future breaks from the present, is episodic, and the present is transitory while the future is permanent

constructive negation and detotalized totalities

pure negativity: freedom of negation

creative negativity creative freedom of negation; the creative metabolization of reality which is a a matter of pursuing expansion of existence; break things to create new ones

detotalized totalities: ongoing evolving totalities we participate in to create the ongoing future; we are freedom self realization in real time; a unit of individuals who COULD act differently at any time

the festival

after Paris was liberated from the Nazis a huge celebration occurred, the festival was a way to stop time from moving forward, as well as to mark the ending of one timeline and beginning of another; a way to mark the collision of past, present, and future

failure of action

Beauvoir underscores oe action involves inherent failure but we must try again and by quitting we fail to acknowledge our facticity; we must at but not get dogged down in action principles; this means to think about how you act but keep moving forward; theory and practice are on a continuum but not opposed

DAY 2 TAKEAWAYS

we must recognize our subjectivity in the world with other subjects rather than just excercising positive and negative freedoms; in ethical decision making we are confronted by ambiguity but must act in spite of that; in willing positive freedom we disclose the future in the present, the future is not a static beyond we make it here and now

trolley problem

action = good if it advances fundamental freedom and acknowledges the real living embodied limitations of circumstances. Means and ends both matter. Trolley: Thought experiments are antithetical to ethical decision making, as they assume we live in an ahistorical vacuum. Ethics is not a math problem, an empty formula, or the cultivation of propriety. These ethical systems are themselves unethical due to their failure to face reality as it really is.