A Literary/Philosophical Depiction of The Concept of ‘Authority’

While presenting the ideas of Saramago, which we consider a name deserving a high appreciation by the world of philosophy and literature, it seems that he acknowledges literature as an opportunity to evaluate within the scope of philosophizing. In this context, , he is a thinker who expressed his philosophical views in a tangible and intelligible manner. Indeed, Saramago constructed a system of thinking that take into account the practical reflections of the theory rather than an intensive abstract theoretical thought, as he did in his every literary-philosophical work. This study aimed to discuss how a Nobel Prize-winning writer, who has created a name for himself by his philosophical beliefs, explained a fundamental issue in political philosophy. One of our goals in doing so was to demonstrate that the philosophical contents of literary texts might be treated in a way that makes them philosophical subjects, and literature could be a tool in terms of introducing philosophical views. As a result, it was presented that a concept such as authority would be discussed in a clear and comprehensible way in literary works. The second goal of our study was the argument that preconceptions about human nature are fundamental while expressing an opinion on facts, situations, and organizations with relation to people. Saramago also attempts to explain the concept of authority in terms of his human conception. Although it is discussed in political philosophy, Saramago approaches the concept of authority from a view of human conception, as we have seen throughout the history of philosophy. This human conception, in contrast to the acceptance of enlightenment, implies that humans are prone to evil, and Saramago is not alone in this belief. Even if it was exemplified with Ibn Khaldun and Hobbes in our study, the most common human conception until enlightenment was in this structure. If we make a comment on Saramago’s human conception, we may emphasize that he was influenced by Camus’s work The Rebel or that they provided solutions to the issues of that period with the same point of view since they were both contemporary. Although he appears to be influenced by Sartre and Nietzsche, it is difficult to consider him an existentialist or nihilistic thinker. That arises an issue because Saramago, unlike the aforementioned philosophers, does not trust people due to their weaknesses despite his attribution of great significance to people. According to him, a human is a being with several Achilles heels. Fear, sadness, and ignorance turn individuals into toys in the hands of religions, then people become slaves of religions for the sake of adding a meaning to their entities. However, people are obliged to authorities and religions that offer legitimacy and establish social standards. Saramago, whose description of the state of nature is similar to that of Hobbes, claims that the rules in the animal kingdom apply among humans in the absence of authority, and people might cannibalize each other. Therefore, human beings need authority in some form or another. After defining the fact that human being requires an authority, Saramago emphasizes the significance of the authority being just. Nonetheless, he does not have goodwill for the authority. After realizing that authority will attempt to maintain its authority by any means, Saramago is also concerned about democracy at this point. He also claims that people are misled by manipulations by democratic authorities. In the final analysis, Saramago may also be considered a political philosopher through his evaluations since he propounded significant insights on numerous subjects regarding political philosophy, and it shall not escape from our attention that the literary style in his works also made several difficult philosophical issues more understandable.