On Being An Existentialist

[Philosophy Now]

Stuart Greenstreet chooses to tell us how to become authentically existentialist.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/115/On ... tentialist

[Dalek Prime]

Stuart Greenstreet chooses to tell us how to become authentically existentialist.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/115/On ... tentialist

You must be kidding me. Some guy is going to tell me how to be an 'authentic' existentialist? I'm pretty sure I got that boy scout badge decades ago. Guess I'll have to remain a fake one...

(Calgon, take me away!)

[spike]

The most famous Existentialist in the world at the moment is Donald Trump. He is extending his hate and pessimism all over the place. One could easily slip in one of his existential puddles. In fact he often extends like a dog, but with far less thought.

[tbieter]

Doesn't existentialism deserve to be taken seriously?

[Dalek Prime]

Doesn't existentialism deserve to be taken seriously?

That's the whole pint, T. Absurdity is taken seriously exactly by acknowledging it with absurdity.

[Dalek Prime]

The most famous Existentialist in the world at the moment is Donald Trump. He is extending his hate and pessimism all over the place. One could easily slip in one of his existential puddles. In fact he often extends like a dog, but with far less thought.

My God, have you ever misunderstood existentialism. Its not hate, depression or anger. Its acknowledging absurdity and lack of meaning or point.

[tbieter]

Doesn't existentialism deserve to be taken seriously?

That's the whole pint, T. Absurdity is taken seriously exactly by acknowledging it with absurdity.

I have reached page 78 in my current read, At the existentialist cafe .
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i ... aps%2C2122

For "absurdity", the index lists only "138, 148-52". Which suggests that the idea is not the dominant concept in the existentialist philosophy. If it was, the philosophy would be self-negating philosophy.

"f. Irrationality/Absurdity

"Among the most famous ideas associated with existentialism is that of 'absurdity'. Human existence might be described as 'absurd' in one of the following senses. First, many existentialists argued that nature as a whole has no design, no reason for existing. Although the natural world can apparently be understood by physical science or metaphysics, this might be better thought of as 'description' than either understanding or explanation. Thus, the achievements of the natural sciences also empty nature of value and meaning. Unlike a created cosmos, for example, we cannot expect the scientifically described cosmos to answer our questions concerning value or meaning. Moreover, such description comes at the cost of a profound falsification of nature: namely, the positing of ideal entities such as 'laws of nature', or the conflation of all reality under a single model of being. Human beings can and should become profoundly aware of this lack of reason and the impossibility of an immanent understanding of it. Camus, for example, argues that the basic scene of human existence is its confrontation with this mute irrationality. A second meaning of the absurd is this: my freedom will not only be undetermined by knowledge or reason, but from the point of view of the latter my freedom will even appear absurd. Absurdity is thus closely related to the theme of 'being on its own', which we discussed above under the heading of anxiety. Even if I choose to follow a law that I have given myself, my choice of law will appear absurd, and likewise will my continuously reaffirmed choice to follow it. Third, human existence as action is doomed to always destroy itself. A free action, once done, is no longer free; it has become an aspect of the world, a thing. The absurdity of human existence then seems to lie in the fact that in becoming myself (a free existence) I must be what I am not (a thing). If I do not face up to this absurdity, and choose to be or pretend to be thing-like, I exist inauthentically (the terms in this formulation are Sartre's)." from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

[Dalek Prime]

Existence with no meaning is absurd. I don't care how you define it. It's still a pointless deviation between two voids; the one we were created out of, and the one we're going to. (Yes, I realise you don't agree, T.) But I'm saying it anyways.

[HexHammer]

Existentialism is an outdated branch of philosophy, it was good to give identity to suppressed people, but in these modern times it's useless.

[Ansiktsburk]

Takes a while before the guys at PN sends the issue to us subscribers in Central Scandinavia, and I didn't get the time to read it until now...

I wouldn't say that Existentialism is outdated, I think it is just another name for something that has always been there:

To what extent does a person have a "free will", in the light of the "facticity" described in the article, ie with all the shit you carry with you in your genes, your childhood and so on.

It was very well for Kierkegaard, son of Denmark's richest trader, and for Sartre and Beauvoir, both from wealthy Paris families, both ENS, to go on about guys having to make their own choices.

I don't know about the countries where you guys live, but in Central Scandinavia, even though supposed to be some kind of socialist heaven, It's only the kind of people who had someone who struck gold 2 or three generations back that goes on about "what do I want to do with my life". And it's also those guys, often lefties, that goes on about meat, refugees, saving the planet and stuff.

People from working or lower cameral classes over here don't make all those choices, even though we may have more money than the Patricians. We get a job, try to make as much money that we can buy a house, buy a volvo and throw big juicy steaks on our Weber's.

And that is what that article was all about, for me. Do you agree?

[osgart]

if all of life is only absurd you might be cashing out of living life altogether. So experience becomes pointless and meaningless to you the existentialist. To love to feel joy to give isnt meaningless. It is actually very meaningful. Why would i want to miss that.

[Impenitent]

god is rolling over in his grave

-Imp

[A_Seagull]

Grenstreet writes: " Why is existentialism like faith? Because to base one’s conduct on a belief that one is free to choose is an act of faith, for there’s no way of knowing for sure whether it’s true or false."

Is this supposed to be funny or merely hypocritical? For to use an argument based upon faith that cannot be determined whether it is true ore false to criticise a philosophy because it is supposedly based on faith with no way of knowing whether it is true or false must be one or the other!