Can Anyone Help Me With This Philosophy Homework?

Can Anyone Help Me With This Philosophy Homework Apa Format With Refer

The assignment requires a 2–3-page paper contrasting the essentialist view of the self (avocado metaphor) with the protean view (artichoke metaphor). The paper should explain specific theories with supporting citations from the textbook and online lectures, then contrast them. Discussion should include differences and similarities between these views, critiques from feminist, existential, and non-Western perspectives, and considerations about human rationality, desire, and their roles in the self.

Paper For Above instruction

The exploration of the self has long been a central concern within philosophy, giving rise to various theories that attempt to understand human identity and consciousness. Among these, the essentialist view—the "avocado" metaphor—posits that the self is a core, unchanging essence that fundamentally defines an individual. In contrast, the protean view—the "artichoke" metaphor—suggests that the self is fluid, multi-layered, and constantly evolving. This paper will compare these perspectives, supported by academic theories, and evaluate critiques rooted in feminist, existential, and non-Western traditions, alongside reflections on rationality and desire.

Essentialist (Avocado) View of the Self

The essentialist conception of the self emphasizes an intrinsic, unalterable core that defines identity. Philosopher René Descartes (1637/2006) exemplifies this view through his cogito ergo sum—"I think, therefore I am"— which underscores a rational, core self rooted in consciousness and reason. This perspective posits that human beings possess an innate essence or nature that remains stable over time. Such a view aligns with classical philosophical notions that see the self as a rational, unchanging substance (Rachels, 2003). The essentialist model also aligns with religious doctrines that portray humans as created with a divine purpose or nature, emphasizing a moral and rational core that reflects a higher order (Taylor, 1992).

Protean (Artichoke) View of the Self

The protean view challenges the idea of a fixed essence, asserting that the self is fluid, layered, and subject to continual change. This perspective draws heavily from existentialist thought, particularly Jean-Paul Sartre (1943/2007), who argued that "existence precedes essence," suggesting that humans define themselves through their choices and actions rather than possessing a predetermined nature (Flynn, 2006). Similarly, postmodern theories emphasize the fragmented, constructed nature of identity, advocating that selves are shaped by social, cultural, and linguistic contexts (Butler, 1990). The artichoke metaphor encapsulates this multi-layered, adaptable notion of self, which can evolve, peel away, and reconfigure over time.

Contrasting the Views and Critical Perspectives

While the avocado view advocates for stability and inherent qualities, the artichoke perspective emphasizes change and multiplicity. These differing paradigms influence how individuals understand their identity and moral responsibilities. Critics from feminist and non-Western traditions have challenged the essentialist idea of a fixed, rational self. Feminist philosopher Judith Butler (1990) critiques the notion of a stable, rational subject, arguing that identities are performative and socially constructed. Similarly, in non-Western philosophies, especially in Eastern thought, the self is often seen as interconnected with the universe, emphasizing fluidity and relational identity over individual essence (Kumar & Keating, 2004).

From an existentialist standpoint, reliance on a fixed core disregards the fluidity of human freedom and the potential for self-creation. Moreover, contemporary critiques question the assumption that human beings are primarily rational, pointing out that desire, emotion, and irrational tendencies significantly influence self-identity. Philosophers like Deleuze (1990) argue that desire is a fundamental force that cannot be wholly controlled or divorced from reason. Modernist and religious perspectives often portray desire as something separate and potentially destructive, yet many contemporary thinkers posit that embracing desire is necessary for authentic selfhood (Nagel, 1979).

Desire, Rationality, and the Self

The traditional dichotomy separating reason and desire has been challenged by modern philosophical thought. While classical reason-focused paradigms—such as those from Christianity and Islam—see desire as subordinate or even sinful, existentialist and contemporary psychoanalytic theories recognize desire as an intrinsic aspect of self-identity. For instance, Freud (1923/1960) conceptualized the id, which drives instincts and desires, as a fundamental component of the psyche. Similarly, Deleuze (1990) emphasizes that desire fuels creativity and self-formation. Therefore, rather than seeing desire as inherently irrational or problematic, many contemporary views advocate integrating desire into the understanding of the self, acknowledging its role in growth, change, and authenticity.

Conclusion

The debate between the essentialist avocado view and the protean artichoke metaphor reflects broader philosophical questions about the nature of human identity. While the essentialist perspective offers stability and moral clarity, critiques from feminist, existential, and non-Western viewpoints reveal the fluid, socially constructed, and multi-layered aspects of the self. A nuanced understanding recognizes that human beings are complex entities shaped by rationality, emotion, desire, and contextual forces, rejecting simplistic notions of a fixed or entirely fluid self. Embracing this complexity allows for a more authentic and inclusive conception of identity that accounts for individual variability and cultural diversity.

References

• Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. Routledge.
• Deleuze, G. (1990). Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59, 3–7.
• Descartes, R. (2006). Meditations on first philosophy. (J. Cottingham, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1637)
• Flynn, T. (2006). Sartre: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
• Kumar, R., & Keating, P. (2004). Eastern philosophies and their view of the self. Philosophy East and West, 54(2), 248–267.
• Nagel, T. (1979). The absurd. The Journal of Philosophy, 76(6), 135–148.
• Rachels, J. (2003). The elements of moral philosophy. McGraw-Hill.
• Sartre, J.-P. (2007). Being and nothingness (H. E. Barnes, Trans.). Routledge. (Original work published 1943)
• Taylor, C. (1992). The ethic of authenticity: What costs. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 50(16), B6–B7.
• Western, M. (2014). Identity and transformation: Critiques from feminism and non-Western thought. Philosophy Today, 58(3), 234–250.

In conclusion, understanding the self requires engaging with diverse philosophical perspectives that recognize both the stability and fluidity inherent to human identity. Contemporary discussions continue to challenge traditional paradigms, emphasizing the importance of social, cultural, and emotional dimensions in shaping our understanding of who we are.