K, so if you are your actions and you define yourself and you are your past and all that jazz, then you should be independent. But you aren't because you are influenced by others, and you are concerned with others affairs, and effected by others. So to be free, you should disconcern yourself with others problems. Does that make sense? Is apathy the pathway to freedom? And I know that existentialism implies nihilism, but assuming that the point of life is to be completely free...?
Im not exactly sure, but ill play a bit of devil's advocate here. Its pretty easy to see that others are influence by your actions. If you punch someone, they'll punch back. Couldnt it be that those are really instigated by you and just your actions removed. Since it is your actions that define you, the reaction to your action can also define you. You would still be free, just restricted by self imposed conditions. Thus, you completely control your life. but when reactions to you begin to react to eachother, you begin to lose control, even though those are just your actions removed. At that point, yes Apathy would be the only way to remain free. I personaly dabbled in existentialism for a while, but then a few of my friends and myself came up with a counterproof for existence making existentialism... obsolete? In that philosophy, we truly are apathetic. Nothing really matters to us because we dont believe it exists, however we choose to interact with other for the sake of boredom and happiness.
I've been in that apathetic dilemma before. I found it rather hollow and rather a bit disturbing of a place to be - then I moved on to Buddhist thought. It's like nilism in a way (I've always thought they were two sides of a similar coin) but with the realization that we are not independent but all the same and the pathway to freedom that opened up from there was one of compassion.
Existentialism is a poor man's religion. "OH! So if I can't see him, he doesn't exsist." Poor, and uneducated. Its like asking if a tree falls in a forest and no ones hears it, does it still make a sound? WEll, if you were to stand next to it and it fell, you would know it would make a sound. FACT If you call someone and you can't see them, do they still exsist? Duh... FACT So, to be completely free, you'd have to know that you are alive, and that you can do whatever you set your mind to. Thats free, and freedom...thats another topic.
Are you correlating independence and freedom? You shot yourself in the leg there. Related maybe... in a distant fifth removed cousin kind of way. Everyone is granted a positional conciousness... and it's the way that you act within the walls of this existence that deems you whatever. I think there's a huge difference between an objective existentialist viewpoint of the situation and that of your average ignorant Joe. I think it's the knowledge and understanding of myself that goes into every decision that makes every choice independent. It's the understanding that at the end of the day everything you do is for you.... so in a sense... you're more affected by your own knowledge than you are of the outside world.... get it? It's the application of your mindset into your positional existence that makes you free. You are free because you are free to do so. Apathy.... Apathy could very well your freedom... It was for me for a long time... But I think it's extreme... I just make my choices with the ripple effect in mind... "How will this affect me and my positional consciousness?" Why would you want to be free though... We have 70 some years of drama and entertainment and an objective mind.. Let's cause some ruckus....
Apathy isn't freedom if you can't help but care; you would constantly be struggling not to care. In my experience, the thing is to care and not to care.
