Confluence of Choices and Decisions.

"Your life is yours to create."
- from the film, Waking Life

Today, I realized that existentialism is not just ordinarily a part or branch of post-modern philosophy. There is an essential demarcation that detaches significantly these two streams of thinking from each other –– the manner by which each stream views and assigns values to the individual self.

Post-modernists often see the individual as “a social construction, or as a confluence of forces, or as fragmented or marginalized.” Such distinctive notion is taken to farthest extreme to the point of leaving behind some absolute essentials. Simplistically, it reduces the concept of the individual as a product of his circumstances, and of the kind of society where he thrives. That the occurrence of every single event, be it success or failure, be it happiness or despair, is way beyond the grasp of the individual. That the individual is incidental, contingent to whatever it is that pre-exists and exists before him. Hence, it is the society, no more, no less that predetermines and contours the making of the individual.

The problem with this is suggestive of the infinite possibilities of excuses and of venting. Since the individual is viewed a social construct, all that happens to him are ascribed deferentially to societal dynamics rather than to the specific and unique individuality that he encumbers. All the commiseration, disappointment and failure that the individual experiences out of fear, resentment, and inability to cope are attributed to the variegated elements structuring the society. Ultimately, it somehow relinquishes from the individual the responsibility to take charge in the consequences of his actions.

And so inevitably, post-modernists often speak the language of transcendence, of emancipation, and of liberation from the tyrannical conventionalities and repressive conformities that sardonically barricades the free development of the individual self. This is precisely the reason why post-modern philosophy is often perceived as a philosophy of despair, relegating a sense of anguish, of anxiety and of angst about life and living.

Existentialism, like post-modern philosophy, seems to acquire the same reputation as philosophy of despair. But contrary to such conception, the truth is just the opposite.

Existentialism stresses singularity in the midst of social structuring by seeing “the uniqueness and isolation of the individual experience.” Unlike post-modernism, it puts premium on the ability of the individual to decide and choose, and to take responsibility for the consequences of his actions. It does not matter what decisions are made and how it is made for as long as it is adequately remunerated with utmost responsibility.

When post-modernists awfully nag about the sad realities of life, existentialists gladly celebrates life as a kind of exuberance. When post-modernists grudgingly brood their angst and attribute their anguish over societal institutions, existentialists attribute no significant meaning on each happenstance but nonetheless, delight over living life in each moment with fervent passion, in the sense of taking upon themselves the responsibility of shaping their individuality, of making something out of themselves, and of feeling good about life and living. And when post-modernists become pessimists about the world, about life, existentialists turn it around into lucid optimism.

The confluence of choices and decisions delicately forms the individual self, of what it is to be and not throughout its existence and all through its inevitable interaction with society. The existence of the confluent societal forces often drive and compel the individual into action. Still, it is variable and circumstantial –– the individual self can choose not to falter, and can choose not to make irresponsible decisions by becoming censoriously cautious.