Existentialism

[Soma]

I am a student of philosophy and I was wondering what your thoughts on existentialism are. What do you think of the idea? Please respond to this openly and welcome to others opinions as (in all philosophy) there is no right or wrong answer. I just wish to view what your individual ideas are regarding the concept.

[IrishCanadian]

I think that existentialism is the easy way out. A creation of "truth" is not human's place. There is too much choice in existentialism and therefore becomes a perversion of the metaphysical reality. Having said all this, who would want to choose an invented "reality" that has you depressed all the time?

[Bandini]

Read Sartre's 'Nausea'. Then read Camus' L'Etranger (The Outsider). Then pretend to read 'Being and Nothingness', but really just dip into it with 'Using Sartre' byMcCullocch in your other hand - it gets a bit tedious otherwise to be honest.

Existentialism is the easy way out?? Once you dealt with the angst man!

[Soma]

I don't find existentialism as the easy way out. It is merely a view point on how to view the coming into existance. It is not by any means and easy way. I find that the most prominent way to learn the diferent views of existentialism is by reading both Kirkegaard and Sartres works. Just any of the different works can shed light on teh subject. Bandini, I must say though that once you deal through all the angst that comes with such and idea one can also come to a feeling of totally ecstasy and realization of ones thoughts after having fully seardhed and pondered the idea.

[Bandini]

I'm there matey!

[genoveva]

I think that existentialism is the easy way out. A creation of "truth" is not human's place. There is too much choice in existentialism and therefore becomes a perversion of the metaphysical reality. Having said all this, who would want to choose an invented "reality" that has you depressed all the time?

:lol: Thanks for the laugh!
There is at least one fairly recent thread on Existentialism. Be sure to check that out. For me, organized religion is "the easy way out". There you will find humans trying to create "truth". Too much choice? In my opinion, there is no such thing. Sure, dictators and the like may not want to allow "too much choice". Anyhow, I don't find Existentialism, in general, to be depressing. Sure, Nihilists can get you really depressed, but in general, I find that Existentialism makes you think. Wow! What a concept- to think about our existence, rather than just be spoon fed "the truth" (whatever that is).

[Bandini]

Spot on.....

[Soma]

These are great thoughts. Lets keep them coming

[Bandini]

Got to go and watch the Kieth Allen thing on TV - I like it.

[Stanislaw]

Check out the book breakfast of Champions, 'tis interesting.

[IrishCanadian]

:lol: Thanks for the laugh!
There is at least one fairly recent thread on Existentialism. Be sure to check that out. For me, organized religion is "the easy way out". There you will find humans trying to create "truth". Too much choice? In my opinion, there is no such thing. Sure, dictators and the like may not want to allow "too much choice". Anyhow, I don't find Existentialism, in general, to be depressing. Sure, Nihilists can get you really depressed, but in general, I find that Existentialism makes you think. Wow! What a concept- to think about our existence, rather than just be spoon fed "the truth" (whatever that is).
You see! I just made you think. I don't want to get into a religious debate. But with existentialism (thou I admit that I havent read your recommendations yet) there is no think. There just is. That is how it is the easy way out. Angst is terrible etc. No quam there. But that does not mean that other beliefs are without their stress. I think that these sorts of debates are usually due to each person only having read up on what they believe in. I would like to learn more about the "think" in existentialism (because I just don't see it now), so i will. But you guys should read the confessions of Saint Augustine.
"Our hearts are restless until they rest in You." says Augustine on the first page. If this is so, where the heck do you think the Angst comes from? If there is nothin greater there is nothing to get anxious about .. well sure, there is the fact that there is nothig greaer, but then -- why would you care?

[Union Jack]

Existentialism is often reduced to the phrase “existence before essence” and this phrase is accurate in describing on of the basic tenants of this belief, yet it is in no way a summary of the philosophy. Essentially, our lives, the world itself has no meaning for us except as far as we can create meaning through acting upon our situation. Existentialists recognize a difference between existence and a meaningful existence.

The classic example (used in Camus’s famous essay) is that of the Greek hero Sisyphus. Sisyphus was a Greek hero who defied the gods. As such he was damned to eternally rolling a huge rock up a hill. The rock would never stay at the top, as soon as the peak had been reached, the boulder would roll back down to its original place. The physical strain of rolling this rock up the hill was not the punishment itself, the Gods purposed to trap him in an existence that was futile and meaningless, causing him to fall into despair.

Yet, Sisyphus decides to roll the rock anyway, even though it is futile. It is important to recognize that there was a choice, he could push the stone, or merely sit down and wallow in despair in face of his futile existence. Nevertheless, he chooses to act upon his situation, and through acting upon it, he redefines his situation, rather than allowing the fates to simply act upon him and thereby define his existence.

Sisyphus is the epitome of the existentialist ideal because he…
A) Refuses to accept the definition of his eternity, which the Gods place upon him.
B) Defines the act in a fashion that enables him to create a personal; meaning and have full self-realization, through the process.

In refusing to fall into despair, Sisyphus defeats the Gods at their own game, and produces a meaningful (to him) eternal struggle against the will of the Gods.

Existentialism is certainly not “ the easy way out” in fact it may be one of the most difficult teaching to follow. Even given the futile meaningless of our existence, we must act, only through this action may we derive any true meaning from our lives.

Existentialism calls upon everyone to act, take life head on, make decisions and define themselves through a refusal to give in to the crushing power of “fate.”

Even if the situation is hopeless, always fight to the end, you must, if not, you do not have a meaningful existence. Make the choice to act upon your situation rather than having it act upon you.

Suggested Reading: Albert Camus ( The Plague, The Stranger, The Fall)

I hope this has been helpful.

[ktd222]

Existentialism calls upon everyone to act, take life head on, make decisions and define themselves through a refusal to give in to the crushing power of “fate.”

Even if the situation is hopeless, always fight to the end, you must, if not, you do not have a meaningful existence. Make the choice to act upon your situation rather than having it act upon you.

Yes, and you must be aware that the meaning you put into reality is your meaning. Don't project your meaning of reality on anyone else with an 'or else,' which, religions do.

[Union Jack]

Yes, and you must be aware that the meaning you put into reality is your meaning. Don't project your meaning of reality on anyone else with an 'or else,' which, religions do.

I don't necessarily feel that religions "projecting" their views on life is a negative thing. A diversity of beliefs and philosophies is essential for a healthy mind, and world-culture. Expressing our veiws is one way of fighting a homogenization of thought. Just because a faith is "preaching" their religion and viewpoints, does not mean they are trying to impose them upon you. They are merely advertising their stance, as we all are in posting here. Merely listen to what they have to say, you do not have to "believe" or accept it, agree or disagree with whatever you want, but never ignore others due to diverging beliefs.

[ktd222]

I don't necessarily feel that religions "projecting" their views on life is a negative thing. A diversity of beliefs and philosophies is essential for a healthy mind, and world-culture. Expressing our veiws is one way of fighting a homogenization of thought. Just because a faith is "preaching" their religion and viewpoints, does not mean they are trying to impose them upon you. They are merely advertising their stance, as we all are in posting here. Merely listen to what they have to say, you do not have to "believe" or accept it, agree or disagree with whatever you want, but never ignore others due to diverging beliefs.

Me neither, not wholly, at least. 'Negative' is your word. Maybe you should read my post again.

[Union Jack]

After rereading I came to the same conclusion, you said "Don't project your meaning of reality on anyone else with an 'or else,' which, religions do." this implies that religion's projecting their views is a negative act, and you advise against doing the same.
Did I misunderstand?

[ktd222]

After rereading I came to the same conclusion, you said "Don't project your meaning of reality on anyone else with an 'or else,' which, religions do." this implies that religion's projecting their views is a negative act, and you advise against doing the same.
Did I misunderstand?

Yes you did. Their is no alternative implications to that statement other that is what religions do.

[Union Jack]

Yes and when you say "Don't" do this, and then continue to say religions do it. Its not implied, you are directly stating through your word choice that you disagree with this practice.
I'm honestly not trying to start an aurgument, I am merely trying to understand your position fully, and your statement, as read, paints religions "projecting their views" in a negatvie light.

[Gallantry]

James W. Sire addresses Existentialism quite well I think in his book "The Universe Next Door". His main point is that, being based on subjectivity, it is seperated from reality, yet the atheistic existintialist suffers from the reality of death just as much as anyone else. He concludes the section on atheistic existentialism(there is another section on theistic existentialism such as Kierkegaard) by saying "Many would say that that is not to go beyond nihilism at all; it is only to don a mask called value, a mask stripped clean away by death."
O, and hello to the forum this is my first venture to this board.

[genoveva]

Yet, Sisyphus decides to roll the rock anyway, even though it is futile. It is important to recognize that there was a choice, he could push the stone, or merely sit down and wallow in despair in face of his futile existence. Nevertheless, he chooses to act upon his situation, and through acting upon it, he redefines his situation, rather than allowing the fates to simply act upon him and thereby define his existence.

[/I]

Thank you for this wonderful post. This is a good reminder to us all. :thumbs_up

[Union Jack]

Thank you for this wonderful post. This is a good reminder to us all. :thumbs_up
No problem, Cheers.

[Dilettantia]

Hi All

I just wanted to say "great thread" and everyone's contributionsc are excellent. I'm sorry I don't have anything to contribute myself just now. Tell you what, I'll go away and think on it a bit first...

[smoothherb]

my thoughts on existentialism is that it has almost become a cliche to speak of it I have read a lot on it and over time I have found myself changeing my mind and argueing with myself that it's actually worth thinking of I think that many people who write and speak of it have no clue to what it is or anything about it maybe it's a tool for fools to feel intelligent maybe i'm a fool who knows about it all I can say is that one of the most useless thoughts one can ponder is that if there was no god who's to say whats right or wrong.

[mono]

Though I agree with everyone's opinions in previous posts, I have nearly found all existentialism both correct and incorrect. Much of existentialism relies greatly on logic and rational reason; and most religions rely more on faith. No matter how logical one gets in his/her linear thinking, however, I have always found that every element of thought contains some sort of influence of faith, as William James wrote in The Varieties of Religous Experiences; with this, I think this seems where most philosophers and thinkers disagree in the most intense of logical thinking.
For me, some books that have impacted my thoughts in existentialism, in no specific order: Critique Of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant, anything by David Hume and George Berkeley, Being And Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre, Metaphysics by Aristotle, the vast amount of works by Plato, writings of Pythagoras, Buddhist teachings, essays by Michel de Montaigne, Markings by Dag Hammarskjöld, works of Cicero, and various writings of Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer.
Even if one reads all of these, plus more, however, neither of them shall agree; some, of course, may partially agree, but if I have learned anything about existentialism, it bases itself much more in inevitable subjective perceptions and skepticism.

[Cormeister37]

I would describe myself as an existentialist, and I understand it to be the following:

An existentialist views the words subjectively, as one's own make. Each person being entirely individual, they are allowed to shape their own views and treat life as such. It does not discount religion.

Although I would like to understand Kierkegaard and his notion of despair better. I guess I understand it as the relation between the self and the infinite, but that's about as far as I can go before I get lost. If anyone could simplify it for me...otherwise I'll just take a class on it.

[holdencaulfield]

"existentialism" for me is living with the eternal hope that tomorrow everything will be fine.
(but tomorrow never comes!)

[cosmos..33]

I am an atheistic existentialist. I find it very liberating, but with freedom comes immense responsibly. There is no one to "save" me; it's all up to the individual.

PM me if you want to know more.

[genoveva]

I have found myself changeing my mind and argueing with myself that it's actually worth thinking of I think that many people who write and speak of it have no clue to what it is or anything about it maybe it's a tool for fools to feel intelligent maybe i'm a fool who knows about it all I can say is that one of the most useless thoughts one can ponder is that if there was no god who's to say whats right or wrong.

How very existential of you! :brow:

[Apotropaic]

I don't necessarily feel that religions "projecting" their views on life is a negative thing. A diversity of beliefs and philosophies is essential for a healthy mind, and world-culture. Expressing our veiws is one way of fighting a homogenization of thought. Just because a faith is "preaching" their religion and viewpoints, does not mean they are trying to impose them upon you. They are merely advertising their stance, as we all are in posting here. Merely listen to what they have to say, you do not have to "believe" or accept it, agree or disagree with whatever you want, but never ignore others due to diverging beliefs.
Oh really? Who came up with the word 'heresy'? I tell you, religions' original intent is to impose them upon you. What do you think the missionaries hundreds of years ago say to make people believe in what they preach? 'Do good or else [insert god here] will punish you.' There's always an 'or else'. They never go, 'well here's my two cents on the subject, so, feel free to disagree with me. It's alright.' It's actually only now that we've got religious tolerance. They killed people over religious matters back in the days. They still do, sort of.

Anyway, except that, I agree with everything else you said.

[laneclark]

Irish Canadian,

You should read some existentialist text before you say something like that.
Really generalized and off-based.

Sartre's

'Existentialism is a Humanism'

try that.

[Woland]

Existentialism is often reduced to the phrase “existence before essence” and this phrase is accurate in describing on of the basic tenants of this belief, yet it is in no way a summary of the philosophy. Essentially, our lives, the world itself has no meaning for us except as far as we can create meaning through acting upon our situation. Existentialists recognize a difference between existence and a meaningful existence.

The classic example (used in Camus’s famous essay) is that of the Greek hero Sisyphus. Sisyphus was a Greek hero who defied the gods. As such he was damned to eternally rolling a huge rock up a hill. The rock would never stay at the top, as soon as the peak had been reached, the boulder would roll back down to its original place. The physical strain of rolling this rock up the hill was not the punishment itself, the Gods purposed to trap him in an existence that was futile and meaningless, causing him to fall into despair.

Yet, Sisyphus decides to roll the rock anyway, even though it is futile. It is important to recognize that there was a choice, he could push the stone, or merely sit down and wallow in despair in face of his futile existence. Nevertheless, he chooses to act upon his situation, and through acting upon it, he redefines his situation, rather than allowing the fates to simply act upon him and thereby define his existence.

Sisyphus is the epitome of the existentialist ideal because he…
A) Refuses to accept the definition of his eternity, which the Gods place upon him.
B) Defines the act in a fashion that enables him to create a personal; meaning and have full self-realization, through the process.

In refusing to fall into despair, Sisyphus defeats the Gods at their own game, and produces a meaningful (to him) eternal struggle against the will of the Gods.

Existentialism is certainly not “ the easy way out” in fact it may be one of the most difficult teaching to follow. Even given the futile meaningless of our existence, we must act, only through this action may we derive any true meaning from our lives.

Existentialism calls upon everyone to act, take life head on, make decisions and define themselves through a refusal to give in to the crushing power of “fate.”

Even if the situation is hopeless, always fight to the end, you must, if not, you do not have a meaningful existence. Make the choice to act upon your situation rather than having it act upon you.

Suggested Reading: Albert Camus ( The Plague, The Stranger, The Fall)

I hope this has been helpful.

Great post

[Ryan_002]

First off, it's important to understand the historical context in which Existentialism was born. Remember that after WWII several of the Nazis claimed innocence because their "culture" or their "society" somehow "made" them kill 6 million Jews. Form their perspective, they were raised thinking Jews were bad, therefore, they had no responsibility for their actions.

Existentialism mounts a strong counter-offensive. Man is always capable of imagining a different solution, of picturing things being *different* from how they are. Existentialists would say that when those Nazis accepted their doctrine of hatred, they *chose* to. They were influenced, but not "forced". (The only laws you are "forced" to obey are laws like gravity). Unlike a brick, that has no say in the building it becomes, nor wishes to be other than what it is, humanity bears the weight of responsibility for its actions. Existence precedes essence.

(Whilst some elements of existentialism were borrowed from German philosophers, these philosophers, barring Heidegger, existed LONG before the Reich. Also, Sartre was a French soldier who did live for a period in a German concentration camp. In light of this, and the nature of his work, assertions of existentialism having "Nazi roots" are as valid as assertions that Nietzche's was a "Nazi philosophy". That is to say, totally invalid and usually claimed by fools.)

To the Existentialist, "bad faith" is not merely "religion", although it can *take* the form of religion. "Bad faith" occurs when a person, wanting to deny responsibility for an action, asserts that he or she had "no choice". For example, if I murder someone, then claim it is because I "had a broken childhood", that would be bad faith. I would be hiding from my own freedom because I want to avoid responsibility for my actions.

Considering the nature of the post 9/11 world, I daresay Existentialist tenets (note that I say tenets, not the WHOLE philosophy) could play a vital role today, 60 years past its original inception. It is not a philosophy of depression, it is a *humanism*. It seeks to place the weight of man's actions on man alone, and in this sense, to condemn existentialism is also to condemn the same philosophical underpinnings of the Renaissance, which was was above all charactertized by humanist thought.

When he died around 1981, Jean Paul Sartre was no longer an existentialist. However, he had not forsaken ALL aspects of existentialism. I would encourage the same approach.

(I am a Roman Catholic.)