Background
I come from a family of designers. In the sense that both my parents work in the same field, having graduated from the same design school. The way I have been introduced to the field is as a way of living rather than as a profession. To be creative is said to require good observation skills, the ability to think laterally or to be able to connect the dots and a host of other skills that help in the process of realizing unique ideas. To be able to do this well (consistently) requires practice. These practices are incorporated into the life of a designer.
When we discussed the pitfalls of play-acting a certain role or profession from the perspective of Existentialism, I found it particularly relevant. Similar arguments had come up with batch-mates about having focused versus having diverse interests in life- Does engaging with a very different field take you away from another? Would it be better to view other fields through the lens of the one you choose to be in? Questioning my view further, it becomes important to understand the nature of these roles- does both living a profession and following a way of life lead to the same problem? The problem of being entrapped by an ideal. How does one engage with ideals? Ideals seem to be inevitable to society today. Should they be avoided completely?
Ideals
Ideals are a set of values and beliefs that guide a person’s decisions in life. These ideals are a type of general idea or concept. The validity of such concepts is established by the method of their production. Thinkers like Rousseau and Kant, assume a hypothetical situation in prehistory that finds man in a natural state. Man existed without language, reason and ideas in this initial state. Rousseau attributes man with certain pre-conditional characteristics termed actualities and potentialities. Actualities of self-preservation and compassion guided human behaviour in nature. Potentialities of free-will and self-improvement are inherent qualities latent in every human. These are actualized according to the circumstances an individual is in. Reason is generated with this actualization. Reason is a method of thinking that connects cause and effect. First ideas were experienced directly from physical existence in nature. If a primitive language exists it was said to exist as sounds standing in for entire propositions.
“When a monkey leaves without the least hesitation one nut for another, are we to think he has any general idea of that kind of fruit, and that he compares its archetype with these two individual bodies? No certainly; but the sight of one of these nuts calls back to his memory the sensations which he has received from the other; and his eyes, modified after some certain manner, give notice to his palate of the modification it is in its turn going to receive.”
Rousseau is said to assume a necessity for language in primitive humans that allows for the formation of general concepts. As individuals began to communicate compare experiences through discourse, knowledge was created and ideals were generated.
The generation of ideals can also be understood in terms of the aristocratic paradigm. Aristocrats generated ideals through their actions. These ideals were followed by plebians as a potentiality (an ought to). This ‘entrapment of language’ applied to aristocrats as well.
The question that arose from this study of medieval life was whether the actions of the aristocracy was inherently moral.
Rousseau’s choice of a compassionate man in the natural state was required to establish its goodness. This would have been aligned to ideas of morality at the time. These ideas of morality were established by religion. Kant on the other hand stated that freedom could only emerge from Pure Reason. Instead of religion, existence comprehended through Reason was the basis of these ethics.
Nietzsche called this the Religious Paradigm. In this paradigm the essence of man as willed by God preceded his existence. Freethinkers before Nietzsche needed to show that religion was in conformity with their theories. For Rousseau, religion needed to reflect alinguistic natural instincts. On the other hand, reason which explained some experiences could not cover religion which was to explain all experiences. With time there was a transfer of power from religion to industry.
Professionalism
Why do we choose professions? Modern conventions place value on the output of a person. A person is identified by their actions and the economic value of those actions determines their worth in society. Individuals interact at the marketplace. These transactions are commercial in nature- people identify themselves as buyers and sellers. As they continue to play these roles they begin to identify themselves with the same. Their existence becomes influenced by the economic structures of the time. The ideals held by people are consequently found in professions.
x
