Exposit both Sartre's account of freedom and Kant's. Which of the two is the most cogent (compelling or convincing) or is th

Pages 5 (1255 words)
Download 0
The concept of freedom is one of the main for different peoples and communities in order to get the best they can and to have peaceful relationships, therefore. However, an entirely difficult meaning of freedom differs for various persons and even whole nations.


Nevertheless, looking at the universal aspects of morality and rationality, Kantian “freedom” is more cogent to get it and further put in action. First off, the existentialistic ideas proposed by Sartre follow the idea of absurd and determinism. To be precise, Sartre is likely to suggest a free will when he talks on freedom able to override people’s rationality (Palmer 283). In other words, he pinpoints that a man is allowed to do what he/she wants to notwithstanding possible negative outcomes after possessing such a freedom. Obviously, Sartre highlights the concept of freedom in keeping with the best tradition of the existentialism. As opposed to Kant’s interpretation, Sartre underpins the idea of freedom by the idea of values people get thereafter: “Sartre has radicalized Kant’s view that the source of value is always the human being, and he has prioritized freedom over rationality” (Palmer 292). Henceforth, Sartre does not rely on the omnipotence and power of reason. Regardless of it, he shows up the pleasure of freedom as if behind the social life. In turn, Kant would oppose this characterization by giving more grounds to freedom which is a result of a man’s rationality. Immanuel Kant worked out his own vision of the moral philosophy when highlighting the need for freedom. However, he suggests lots of arguments to make his vision out. ...
Download paper
Not exactly what you need?