Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Sartre's 'bad faith' analysis shows agents sometimes use self-deception to sustain engagement with values they could not maintain under radical lucidity.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Sartre conflates epistemic self-deception with metaphysical freedom; agents need not deceive themselves—they can consciously choose values despite groundlessness.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The claim assumes sustained values require illusion, but many demonstrate genuine commitment through rational acceptance of existential contingency without bad faith.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Empirical psychology confirms humans employ motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance reduction to maintain commitments despite contradictory evidence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Complete transparency about arbitrary value-foundations would psychologically paralyze agents; some opacity enables functional engagement with meaning.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Sartre's account explains why sincere commitment and self-deception coexist—agents partially obscure their freedom to sustain authentic project engagement.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42