Final Exam - Phil-2130: Existentialism

Instructor: Dr. Max Schaefer Name:

Results: Class: Phil-2130: Existentialism

Period: Summer Semester

Date:

The Final Exam is worth 40% of your final mark in the class.

3 Short-Answer Questions:

Please read each prompt carefully and provide a response between 300-400 words. If you go over 400 words, no
problem, but do be sure to write at least 300 words. If you do not provide a response of at least 300 words, then
marks will be deducted. Each short response is to be a personal piece of writing — just like the critical response
posts you submitted throughout most of the semester. Each response is worth 10 points.

1. Existential philosophers such as Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir believe that human existence
involves facticity and transcendence. Outline what is meant by each of these terms and how the denial of either
leads to an inauthentic life of bad faith.

Page 1
Facticity' and 'transcendence' are the grand concepts of existentialism. Facticity in existentialism refers to
the concrete, inescapable aspects of human existence that we do not choose or control. These are the
objective facts of our lives, such as our biological, social, and historical circumstances. Facticity includes
elements like our birth, family, cultural background, physical attributes, and the time and place we are
born into. In essence, facticity constitutes the given conditions that shape our existence without our direct
influence. Transcendence, on the other hand, represents the human capacity to go beyond our factual
limitations and shape our lives through choices, actions, and decisions. It is the ability to transcend the
given conditions and assert our freedom by making authentic choices. Transcendence reflects the
existentialist notion that we are not solely determined by our past or circumstances, but we have the
power to define ourselves through our actions and choices. When individuals deny or ignore the factual
aspects of their existence, they engage in bad faith. Denying facticity involves rejecting or avoiding the
objective realities of one's life. This can manifest in various ways, such as disowning one's past, ignoring
the cultural and historical context of one's actions, or refusing to acknowledge inherent physical
limitations. The denial of transcendence involves relinquishing one's freedom and personal responsibility
by believing that everything is predetermined or dictated by external factors. In this state, individuals see
themselves as passive beings, driven solely by fate or external forces, without the ability to influence their
lives through conscious choices. Facticity and transcendence are vital components of existentialist
philosophy, and the denial of either leads to an inauthentic life of bad faith. Embracing both aspects of
our existence allows us to live authentically, taking responsibility for our choices and shaping our lives in
meaningful ways. By acknowledging our factual conditions while exercising our freedom, we can lead lives
that are true to ourselves and our potential as human beings.

"Facticity" and "transcendence" are the basic ideas of existentialism. The concept of "facticity"
in Existentialism is a term used to describe the tangible and unavoidable aspects of human
existence that are out of our control or decision making. Only a handful of life's key facts can be
found in our biological, social and historic contexts. Facticity covers things like our birth,
families, cultures, physical characteristics, and the time and location we are born into. The facts
include elements such as our birth, family, cultural background, physical characteristics, and the
time and place of our birth. In essence, facticity constitutes the given conditions that shape our
existence without our direct influence. Conversely, transcendence is a human capacity to go
beyond our limitations and affect the lives we live by making choices, actions or decisions. It is
to make our own choices that allow us to overcome those conditions and assert our freedom.

Page 2
2. Outline some of the ways that Viktor Frankl believes human beings can find meaning in their lives.

According to Frankl logotherapy, we can discover this meaning in life in three different ways: by
creating a work or doing a deed, by experiencing something or encountering someone and by the
attitude we take toward unavoidable suffering. Also another way of finding a meaning in life is
by experiencing something such as goodness, truth and beauty by experiencing nature and
culture or, also by experiencing another human being in his very uniqueness.

Frankl’s philosophy of Logotherapy, a process of finding meaning in human life., Frankl beliefs
that people ought to find their own meaning in life, creating it as a result of their views on the
world and experiences within it. By actively participating in life, acting in one’s interests, and
building relationships with others, a person can find meaning in their existence. In his eyes,
human purpose is self-made, regardless of an individual’s life circumstances or events they had
to overcome.

Frankl believes that by understanding the meaning behind their life, a person is able to overcome
any hardship and persevere against difficulties. Recontextualizing the events of one’s life and
having a positive outlook is crucial here, as it allows one to control their feelings about any
particular event. There are, however, three major driving factors behind human life, he contends:
love, work, and courage.

Page 3
Viktor Frankl's theory that people can shape their own experiences through actions, decisions,
and mindsets lies at the core of his conviction that people can discover a meaning in life. By
seeking meaning, finding solace in pain, taking responsibility for one's actions, cultivating
relationships, expressing one's creativity, and adopting spirituality, one can live a life that is
meaningful and filled with value. Frankl's logotherapy is still a potent reminder of human
tenacity, self-discovery, and the search for meaning in the face of adversity.

3. 1Outline Martin Buber’s account of the I-It and the I-Thou relationships and describe why he believes that I-
Thou relationships with other people, the natural world, and God help us become more fully human.

Martin Buber’s account of the I-It and the I-Thou relationships each highlights the differences
between levels of human interaction. There are two basic levels. The first is person-to-person, or
“I” to “Thou.” The second is human-to-object, or “I” to “It.” We can show these relationships as
“I—Thou” and “I—It.” Our relationship with objects is impersonal and one-sided. On the other
hand, when we engage with other people, there is the potential for a mutual exchange of ideas
and consciousness. In the I-Thou relationship, human beings are aware of each oher as having a
unity of being. In the I-Thou relationship, human beings do not perceive each other as consisting
of specific, isolated qualities, but engage in a dialogue involving each other's whole being. In
the I-It relationship, on the other hand, human beings perceive each other as consisting of
specific, isolated qualities, and view themselves as part of a world which consists of things. I-
Thou is a relationship of mutuality and reciprocity, while I-It is a relationship of separateness and
detachment. Buber saw the meeting between I and Thou as the most important aspect of human
experience because it is in relationship that we become fully human. When one meets another as
Thou, the uniqueness and separateness of the other is acknowledged without obscuring the
relatedness or common humanness that is shared. Through fostering our ability for sympathy,
comprehension, and association with other people, the "I-Thou" relation aids in our development
as human beings. It promotes a greater understanding of how we are all related which helps in
the development of feelings of compassion and concern for others around us. We can have a
fuller and more satisfying understanding of what it is to be human by adopting this relational
perspective.

Page 4
Page 5