““Man is nothing else but what he purposes, he exists only in so far as he realises himself, he is therefore nothing else but the sum of his actions, nothing else but what his life is.” Hence we can well understand why some people are horrified by our teaching. For many have but one resource to sustain them in their misery, and that is to think, “Circumstances have been against me, I was worthy to be something much better than I have been. I admit I have never had a great love or a great friendship; but that is because I never met a man or a woman who were worthy of it; if I have not written any very good books, it is because I had not the leisure to do so; or, if I have had no children to whom I could devote myself it is because I did not find the man I could have lived with. So there remains within me a wide range of abilities, inclinations and potentialities, unused but perfectly viable, which endow me with a worthiness that could never be inferred from the mere history of my actions.” But in reality and for the existentialist, there is no love apart from the deeds of love; no potentiality of love other than that which is manifested in loving; there is no genius other than that which is expressed in works of art.”
I have been struggling to understand existentialism, humanism etc. and worrying about how they are relevant to careers advisers, so decided to take the time to read the link to Jean Paul Sartre on Grant’s blog, even though I find it really hard going! Although I still found it hard to read I did suddenly think, when I read the quote above, that I disagree with the premise that we are completely free to make our own decisions. When you are interviewing young people from seriously deprived backgrounds, it is hard to believe that their circumstances, whether at home or in their community, have not impinged on their freedom to make certain choices.
I think that is the value of careers education – in countering the circumstances that some people may face in their daily lives, such as racism, sexism, drugs, alcohol etc. People cannot choose something that they do not know exists but also, sometimes they need to be helped to see how barriers that they may believe are insurmountable can be addressed. They may also need information about potential choices and the knowledge that support exists if they want it. I think this can best be achieved through careers education rather than the individual interview.
If they then choose to continue with their current path that is then a free choice – otherwise their choices are sometimes seriously constrained by circumstances and so the existentialist view that their circumstances have no bearing on their actions is unconvincing.
I’m not sure who left the last comment – it just says anonymous but I thought it summed up exactly what I was trying to say!
Today’s lecture about Kelly, though, perhaps gives more of a sense of hope in that maybe even very negative situations can be learned to be viewed in a different way, thereby achieving a more positive outcome as with cognitive behavioural therapy?
By: sunnyside1234 on March 17, 2009
at 3:45 pm
I was also trying to understand the concepts discussed in the lecture-and also read the piece by Sartre. I agree that we are not all free to choose to do whatever we want. As I read the article I began to think about the way in which our actions are sometimes as a result of past experiences, or as a result of what others have done to us. We are more than the sum of our actions. We may be constrained by many other factors, both material and emotional. These factors cause us to construct barriers, as you say, and for many people it takes a lot of courage to break down the barriers. Belief in the statement that man ‘is nothing else than what his life is’ could carry with it an overwhelming feeling of hopelessness and failure for many people out there who are struggling with life through no fault of their own.
By: Anonymous on March 16, 2009
at 9:53 pm