Society of Spectacle/Hegel - Research Paper Example

?Hegelian Autonomy research paper Hegelian Autonomy Hegel has provided an interesting stand on morality and ethicsin human autonomy. The philosophical work of Hegel on rights is a good perspective from which philosophic writers, researchers and students determine the appropriateness of morality and ethics in human autonomy. This paper will determine how consumer structure in the society may affect the realization of human autonomy as described by Hegel. The thesis of this paper is that “the structure of consumers in the society has frustrated human autonomy through unethical and immoral practices. This paper will attempt to support this thesis using evidence from research. According to Hegel, morality is an aspect which reflects and depends on the infinite will of an individual. An individual’s will on the other hand represent’s an individual’s freedom (Shelton, 2000). Therefore, morality relates to an individual’s freedom to perform activities. Freedom is set from subjectivity perspective in which the will of an individual is independent and identical to the universal will. Hegel also suggests that moral persons are not primarily described by their opposition to the immoral. The right is also not characterized by being in opposition to the wrong. The will is the ultimate determination of one’s being immoral or moral. Furthermore, morality is characterized by self-determination which is in essence a cause constant activity that never ends in anything that is. a deed of an individual alters the state of affairs prevalent in the individual, hence the deed confronts the will which in turn carries the responsibility for its deed. This shows that morality is guided by the responsibility of a person for his/her actions as well as his/her purpose in acting as he/she does. Universality is an important aspect in the morality of an individual. This is because purpose involves more than just a unit but a universal aspect of the action (Church, 2011). Hegel therefore argues that an action is described as burning or killing only if such an action is considered as an external deed without determining its wrongness or rightness. Therefore, the externality of a person’s action is correlated to the person. A person’s end is determined by the content of his/her actions. Hegel holds that immoral acts such as murder are not positive actions, but the motive of the murdering has some positive end. Hegel also categorizes morality in terms of good and conscience (Church, 2011). In this case, Hegel contents that good is a realization of freedom which is an end and the aim of the world. Relating good to right, Hegel observes that welfare is not independent in terms of validity but is considered as a universal principle as in relation to freedom. As such, welfare should be accompanied with right in order to be considered as good. The will is considered valuable if its intention is in accordance with the good. The will is therefore subject to the right that if it considers anything to be valid, then it shall see it as being good (Wallace, 1995). In general, good is just but an existing phenomenon in the will or thinking of a person. In this case, the right of a subject lies on the right of only recognizing what one considers as rational, based on the will of that person. Hegel also considers ethical life as an ideal of freedom. In essence, ethical life is the living part of the good. It is the good manifested in self-consciousness, in which knowing and willing play a crucial role. The good is also actualized by a self-conscious action. This is the basis of human autonomy according to Hegel. Ethical life is therefore an element manifestation of freedom exhibited in the natural world and inherently displaying the entire aspect of self-consciousness. Therefore, ethical and moral lives are basically the outcomes of self-consciousness, the will and freedom of human beings. The morality and ethicality of a person are thus dependent on human autonomy. The freedom human beings are accorded by their subjective will enables them to exhibit either moral or ethical lives. However, morality and ethical lives lie deep in the thinking of an individual (Wallace, 1995). The universal world does not account for an individual’s action because whatever action an individual believes to be right is only in accordance with his/her thinking and will, not the general perception of the universal will. If the world grants an individual the freedom to choose what is right or wrong, self-consciousness guides the individual the opportunity to do whatever he/she thinks is good. This does not necessarily have to conform to what others in the society consider as good. The ethical and moral lives of individuals therefore lie on the will and thinking of the individual. In relation to the thesis of this paper, it seems plausible to argue that consumers have aligned their structure according to their will, making use of their freedom. Therefore, the structure of consumers affects human autonomy as described by Hegel. Consumers in the world are guided by preferences in their choice of consumption behaviours. This is in conformity with what Hegel terms as will and freedom of an individual. In pursuit of freedom and guided by self-consciousness through subjective will, individuals often seek to justify what they term as right by exercising actions that appear to be right to them. Since consumers are not the same in terms of preference, the choice and actions of one consumer may offend or affect the choice and action of another consumer. This forms a basis of conflict among consumers. This results in a structure of consumers which seems to frustrate the aspect of human autonomy. This is because the conflict arising from consumer structure may hinder the freedom of each individual in the society. The actions and practices of consumers in pursuit of their freedom may be considered by the other members of the consumer circle as unethical or immoral. This is based on the fact that Hegel terms ethical and moral practices on the will of an individual. If this will get to intermingle with the will and freedom of others in the consumer structure, self-consciousness may be compromised by the need to accommodate other consumers in the consumer structure (Wallace, 1995). In this situation, each consumer needs to develop empathy and accept the views and choices of other consumers in the market as well as the products offered by the producers. Owing to this re-alignment of consumer’s freedom to accommodate others’ interests, the aspect of human autonomy is frustrated. According to Hegel, immorality and unethical practices occurs when an action of an individual is offends the freedom of another person. In the case of consumer structure, consumers’ freedom of choice and pursuit of individual preference may offend some producers, consumers or other players in the market. Consequentially, this may lead to increased cases of perceived unethical practices and immorality. Because this immorality and unethical practices are presumed from the freedom of consumers, we may argue that consumer freedom has a lot to do with the aspect of consumer structure. As a result, and unethical practices immorality inherent in consumer structure tends to frustrate human autonomy as described by Hegel. References Brooks, T. (2012). Hegel's Philosophy of right. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Church, J. (2011). Infinite Autonomy: the divided individual in the political thought of G.W.F. Hegel and Friedrich Nietzsche. University Park, PA: Penn State University Press. O’Malley, J. (1982). Critique of Hegel’s “Philosophy of right.” New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Shelton, M. (2000). The morality of peace: Kant and Hegel on the grounds for ethical ideals. The review of metaphysics, 54, 379-408. Wallace, R. M. (1995). Mutual Recognition and ethics: a Hegelian reformulation of the Kantian argument for the rationality of morality. American Philosophical Quarterly, 32(3), 263 295. Web address for the JSTOR articles 1. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20131535?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101551662777 2. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20009827?uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101551662777 Read More