Philosophy Questions
Robert Solomon postulated that love is a matter of choice, opposing the normal view that love is a natural feeling that is elicited by our spontaneous attraction to each other. He argues that love is a conscious decision that brings together two people searching for self-identity. In explaining the idea of self-identity, Robert raises the issue of inseparability, whereby, by falling in love, we are looking for that person who makes us comfortable by getting inculcated in our lives to form mosaic kind of a figure, made by an amalgamation of two figures. The fact that we choose our lovers (even in first sight love – here, the fact that we like someone instantly is a result of fantasies and images we have created about that one person in our heads) makes romantic love differ from other forms of love, because, for instance, in a sibling-sibling, or parent-child love, love arises from the fact that these relationships give us a sense of identity.
Jean-Paul Sartre on Romantic love and alienation
Sartre points out the impact of the other on self; by looking at the other, a person learns something about himself or herself that remains a personal secret. The society has expectations and standards that people expect us to follow, and, we see these things in other people and wish to be like them. In that vein, people search for love in the others, in the form of appreciation and romance, an act that makes people lose their freedom. Love leads to complete surrendering of our freedom to someone else, and we become completely dependent on their judgments and thoughts about us. Sartre points this as the reason why romantic love is doomed to fail, because, at some point, the lovers will learn that they are sacrificing so much to other people. The construct in this arrangement is based on consciousness-unconsciousness, in that, beings feel the lack of being, and in the attempt to search for a way to be, they lose their being, and become dependent on the opinions and judgment of others.
Harry Frankfurt and Desires
First order desire is that urge to do something that is effective. For instance, the urge to smoke a cigarette is a first order desire while a second thought not to smoke a second-order desire. The departure of the order of desires argument if framed on the nature of the desire, as either a desire for something (that is not desire) or a desire for another thing, whose nature is that of desire. Compare someone who has a desire for food and someone who has a desire to go out for a discotheque for a dance. The first person has an absolute desire for food (which is something) while the second one has a desire for a dance, that means a first step desire to go out to a club. The two people have different levels of freedom, mainly because the first one has limited control on the desire to eat. From the perspective of freedom of will and action, the person who can control their second order desire (by being able to choose a course over another) has the freedom of action while the person who can control their second order desires has a freedom of will or volition.
Determinism
Determinism is a theory that connects current events to past events, with the postulation that antecedent events have a great impact on current events. For instance, you would not have been born if your parents were not born, or maybe, America would not be there if there was no migration and colonization by the Britain. In individual scenarios, one can connect real life events to past events, like; I got married to so and so because they turned to a certain party which I had attended, and we became friends and lovers, then married and we are living happily. This way of thinking poses the idea that human beings do not have freedom to choose or make decisions that can lead to different results. John Stuart Mill and David Hume pushed forward the idea of having freedom and determinism in coexistence. The backdrop is that determinism is causal making it an unconscious process or mechanical condition that does not take away the ability of someone to make decisions. In essence, even the past events were results of decisions by people.
Aristotle on Virtue
Virtue is a golden mean between two extremes. This means that for something to be good or rational it has to be balanced. For instance, being courageous is a good thing, acceptable in possibly all societies. However, having excess courage might lead to careless behavior that hurts other people. The most desirable way of living is that one which integrates virtue in ordinary lives, making decisions about rationality and concern for others. The successful management of virtue and rationality leads to happiness, as people make decisions by their impact, as opposed to making decisions in the pretext of virtue only. The truth is a good thing, for instance, but pouring too much information to the citizens about the actions of the government can lead to uprising and distress among taxpayers.
