Ethics of Ambiguity

Life doesn’t give us clear answers. We’re constantly torn between choices—between what we want to do, what we should do, and what the world expects of us. Simone de Beauvoir, a pioneering existentialist philosopher, argues that this very tension—what she calls ambiguity—isn’t a problem to solve but the essence of being human. Unlike religious doctrines or rigid moral systems that promise absolute rules, her work invites us to embrace uncertainty as the foundation for a meaningful ethical life.

At the heart of her philosophy is a radical idea: freedom isn’t just about doing what we want—it’s about taking responsibility for our choices while fighting for others’ freedom too. She pushes back against the notion that we’re either fully in control or mere products of circumstance. Instead, we exist in a messy middle: We shape our lives, but we’re also shaped by society, history, and relationships.

Key to her argument is the danger of bad faith—the lies we tell ourselves to avoid hard choices (e.g., “I have to stay in this job” or “This is just how things are”). True freedom, she says, means facing the discomfort of ambiguity head-on and refusing to settle for excuses. But it doesn’t stop there: ethics demands action. If my freedom depends on yours, then oppression—whether sexism, racism, or economic exploitation—isn’t just unfair; it’s a denial of our shared humanity.

An interesting categorization of the 12 ways on how we dodge responsibility that she proposed:
The Sub-Man: Avoids choices entirely ("Just tell me what to do").
The Serious Man: Hides behind rules ("It’s policy, not me!").
The Nihilist: "Nothing matters, so why try?"
The Adventurer: Chases thrills but ignores consequences.
The Passionate Man: Obsessed with one cause (or person) to avoid bigger questions.
The Artist/Creator: Thinks beauty justifies everything.
The Scientist: Treats life like a lab, avoiding moral stakes.
The Mystic: Escapes into spirituality to avoid real-world action.
The Revolutionary: Fights oppression—but risks becoming tyrannical.
The Writer/Philosopher: Observes life but won’t live it.
The Authentic Man: Faces ambiguity head-on (her ideal).

1. Conceptual Groundwork

• De Beauvoir calls ambiguity the "essence of being human." How does this contrast with ideologies promising absolute answers (e.g., religions, rigid moral codes)?
• Can you think of a historical or fictional figure who embodies her ideal of "authentic" freedom? What makes them different from the "Sub-Man" or "Serious Man"?

2. Freedom & Responsibility

• She argues freedom isn’t just personal—it’s interdependent. How does this challenge libertarian or individualist notions of freedom?
• Example: If someone says, "I’m free to ignore politics," how might de Beauvoir respond?

3. Bad Faith in Practice

• Which of the "12 Ways to Dodge Responsibility" do you see most often in society? (e.g., "It’s policy, not me!" vs. "Nothing matters.")
• Can "bad faith" ever be useful? For instance, does pretending to believe in a rule sometimes maintain social harmony?

4. Ethics as Action

• De Beauvoir links oppression to denied shared humanity. How does this reframe debates about privilege (e.g., "I didn’t create racism, so it’s not my problem")?
• Is her view of ethics too demanding? Must we always confront ambiguity, or are there times when relying on tradition/rules is valid?

5. Counterarguments

• Critics say existentialism leads to despair or narcissism. How might de Beauvoir answer this?
• Can her philosophy coexist with deterministic views (e.g., "My choices are shaped by my brain chemistry")?

Easy Reading
SEP: Simone de Beauvoir https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/beauvoir/ (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Internet Encyclopedia: Existentialism https://iep.utm.edu/existent/ (Background on key concepts)
De Beauvoir’s Ethics of Ambiguity https://philosophynow.org/issues/69/The_Ethics_of_Ambiguity